1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 11 F.Supp.
  5. 11 F.Supp. 660 (1935)
 

PRO-PHY-LAC-TIC BRUSH CO. v. ABRAHAM & STRAUS

11 F.Supp. 660 (1935)

PRO-PHY-LAC-TIC BRUSH CO. v. ABRAHAM & STRAUS, Inc.

District Court, E. D. New York.

June 11, 1935.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Nims & Verdi, of New York City (Harry D. Nims, George P. Dike, Wallace H. Martin, and Stewart L. Whitman, all of New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff.

Davies, Auerbach & Cornell, of New York City (Martin Schenck, Kenneth W. Greenawalt, and George T. Bean, all of New York City, of counsel), for defendant.

INCH, District Judge.

Plaintiff seeks an injunction against the use, by defendant, of the word "Prophylactic."

Plaintiff claims that the word "Prophylactic" itself is not well known and when used is descriptively used as an adjective. That a trade-mark in such a word can exist only when it has acquired a secondary meaning. That in the case of plaintiff it has obtained such meaning but not in the case of defendant. That defendant cannot rely on registrations...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases