IP
CALIFORNIA FIG SYRUP CO. v. PUTNAM et al.
69 F. 740·United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit·1895
Before PUTNAM, Circuit Judge, and NELSON and ALDRICH, District Judges.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
CALIFORNIA FIG SYRUP CO. v. PUTNAM et al.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit.
July 26, 1895.)
No. 131.
Trade-Marks— Deceptive Labels—-Infringement— Equitable Relief—66 Fed. 750, Affirmed.
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Massachusetts.
-This was a suit in equity by the California Fig Syrup Company against Kate Gardner Putnam and others to restrain the infringement of a trade-mark. The circuit court dismissed the bill for want of equity (G6 Fed. 750), and the complainant appeals.
E. A. Bakewell, Paul Bakewell, Warren & Brandéis, and Louis I). Brandéis, for appellant.
Pish, Richardson & Storrow, Frederick P. Fish, and James J Storrow, Jr., for appellees.
Before PUTNAM, Circuit Judge, and NELSON and ALDRICH, District Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
We agree with the reasoning and the conclusions of the circuit court in this cause, but we do not wish to be understood to approve all the cases cited in its opinion. It is sufficient to refer to Medicine Co. v. Wood. 108 U. S. 218, 2 Sup. Ct. 436, and to the underlying principles oí Church v. Proctor, 13 C. C. A. 426, 66 Fed. 240, decided by this court February 2, 1895, as supporting the line of reasoning found in that opinion. The decree of the circuit court is affirmed.