Case ID: f_173/html/0796-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "LACOMBE, Circuit Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

SOCIÉTÉ ANONYME, ETC., BENEDICTINE v. HYGRADE WINE CO.
    (Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
    August 6, 1909.)
    Trade-Marks and Trade-Names (§ 95) — Suit for Infringement — Preliminary Injunction.
    A preliminary injunction to restrain alleged, unfair competition denied, where tlie article sold by defendant bore a label which conformed to an order of court made in a suit by complainant against the manufacturer.
    [Ed. Note. — Por other cases, see Trade-Marks and Trade-Names, Dec. Dig. § 95.*] .......
    In Equity. Suit by the Société Anonyme, etc., Benedictine against the Hygrade Wine Company. On motion for preliminary injunction.
    Motion denied.
    George H. Tucker, Jr., fqr complainant.
    Alexander & Green, for defendant.
    
      
      For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
    
   LACOMBE, Circuit Judge.

As to so much of the case as is not disputed upon affidavits, it appears that the liqueur sold by defendant is manufactured by the “A. de Claremont Company” and is sold by defendant with the label stating origin, which this court ordered to be affixed to the bottles sold by the Claremont Company as a condition for denying preliminary injunction in the suit against it. To refuse to allow a resale of the articles once sold in conformity with such order, the label being unchanged, would practically amount to a modification of the former order by restricting the sale of Claremont goods.

For this reason, only, application for preliminary injunction is denied.