New-York daily tribune., 1859-05-16
SUPERIOR COURT-SPscI,L TsRN-May u.
= q L.-.---- u -. -

hat he had adopted tLr abo,e mrn,nrd title
trade mark" TIE public ald the proP1,tor. aga,
The piiuta ia-rducrd III. ar,r upon the ustt'' aui
,p.u, be,ween November J. Is and November. 1855 some
sItoV sd'ersus tne sane t"e demand io5 ,ht a1iT.e
~, N, ais considerable Eaoh btils containing mixture
bad ui The following labe (heIs fo3wss description OF
pltitfia's abel for Cocnanc."1
About tvo yesrs a,,r fs, introduction Of this article by
he palta', fhalou son tue detenda-' Frie.. ot .'
cry coed the sale of sun" na slri
up b,s nt very unlike these OF the Painn ani eicl O'I
of defendants label for Cocoine"i
This mixture ao bad very large sale with much rF'6,
defendants The plaintiff claims that The defend '' have
pirate marx sks that damages b. awarded,
junction may them rne defendants
ms,uTe .npc Iha, plaintiff have No property ia
different name calculated u'sead the public and,
furthermore that Il Is correctly comPned nin the French
Thrr is evidence that the Ilaintt, have committed any
fraud upon the public which superior OF the
tie Court will lot consider II the pl'i cannot acquire
auy property exclusive right in the word OF device thus
COZ ved adopted mis- trade then there ground
Aud. # the deHdsns have adopted ae''ee Or
differing from hst adopted By the PlNun az IN NJ Fe
deceive the phc or do Jay 10 the painh' then tnr de-
feLdn,s Liable in this SUIT by the statutes 81 rn: Ste
mi.tcmeaIor punishable oy inr'sHient l. ORG OF
counterfeit BE- forged couutert-d any represent"
wrapper label usually Affixed By any mechanic or ntnnc
res on sale Of goods wares or mcrcaandt' Win
intent to delaUd the pgchtscr 'c'urr OF
any goods merchandHe Whatsoever Tx ,, pi w. tue
cap ~ Thus Legisa are has AIRED IN str'nE'
tes IT, rrprobation Of all iniTinsemet' by our cl&en'
upor tr5de marx and long prior statutes
tie subject settled law that Manufacturer by pm my ot
manufactures scquife property therein as trade marx tor
Of which action would he and IL The exclusive
4 which he might BE- protected by lnIanc'ion. ,
fThe learned Judge here comments various authorities
Ia the before the Piiinth Burnett, coniryed nane
IN knoi language aud sd his mixture under that apPr
pattd designation for year, al eFtsin5 durnS he entire
tine and IL nearly every IMP rant T r,1. III W cry ''l' nc
The Cocoape. he called hal g'es sale aud after it'
III ,Iatif the ,rndars then commenced heir
mixture the designation OF Phaou sons C3coiue
Was ,hs conryunce calculated u the bulk Of IN
wary purrhaser aud thus benefit the defendants to arr r
p4Itif aud % deceive the pubiic"'
would be fmstive IL Burnett, Cocaine h4d been d.
tive to the human hair Phao Cocour" would got have been
introduced under that designation" " was me '1c ss %. t W
thai the latter and when one Intentionally s
il this cas' closely initiates ne trade mar. OF an1os ,Is
law TO have been done GFtht Plrpse OF inducing as
public believe that the article is a, OF aim whose rae marx
will Of his trade basines Taylor az Carpenter sand Oh
r. COS Affirmed in th Court OF Euor-l Every man has gnt
and when he has appr paod trade letter., combined
before unknown, aud his u,re thit "or and long
acquired rights 4 bich the courts " III protect
The proof clear that the plaintiff had f nearly two years ai
yerts his mixture nearly every Newspaper Ia this y aud
had Published in the that he nad adopted tue word
The defendant was hin., witness aud he did suggest
that he,e had been brought home u his ko|edse
The conclusion irresistible that be w1 aware % the paoci
t.on Of Cooane and for the purpose Of deriving pF'ht from
No one eau appropriate word in general his trade mark
and Others from using that word burnett eanHot ac
quTe property in the words s' "lhr brandy or a 4" III ay
other known to the language and m common u % dr'g
uat he
by the plaintiffs not Of thlt character ahd no
the defendants b. restrained from its trade marx lie
u another deguatun to his mixture Ihrrr - no ne
.,y hate, er or this else imitation Of the plaintiffs mark
and the defendants scarcely have any ohr motive nh py
th hs M h@i oe pS Sr s rats % % 6 % s5ern ere -5tt
Citing a number Of English and American authoriie'l
The plaintiffs entitled To Judgment aud an injunction must
sAur--thr order to be settled on notice ,e,
Mr. Sherwood for plaintiff Givin Dodge for defend
ants.
Adorhus Ranney assignee Ac az James S'''nsrr ahd WI"
This was an action brought by the plaintiff as
as.igr Grossu Wlct to the value O." certain
personal property consisting Of printing presses &C. which was
Of Harper Brothers 1T Grosnan Wal
De sheriff Gr.srnan wistt being Indebted the de-
crdaut. OF = 800 fnc plaintiff charges that the
Gros.nan & Wett a5much the said Grls'man did not
join in the confession OF ;e judgment anf mat the
defendants did acquire any valid title 70 the property The
defendants say that purchased the property Slerfs sale
under several cAecuons recovered tgin
ia q, psers: that they acquired good aud valid title aud
sood h b, the as.isne5 That the property in
qpes, was subject ucGnbnces by way Of personal mott
cages the snouI Of 5000 and upward and that another
action was aud Autonette Prince &C. and
the defendants with others TO iofrcose pretended mortgage
plaintiff closed his defendant counsel moved Tor
dismissal Of the complaint The Count hrld argument on the
motion and finally granted it, ordering the compliant to o. d'
B'rdeyc sommers Johnson for plaintiff John Graham aud
'OHH IL ''1iS before Judge HoFFN.y-DGclsross
Curtis C. Bean ct al. agt. Char es j, Anthony.-Mo-
ton yacate order of arrest denied with 81 o9,'s.
Margaret Cummings Hgt. julius I. Marsh ct al
Henry Wright sgt. Richard A. Stors &c-Ca'es settled
Cor-Rr OF COMMON PLEAs-sPEcl,L Txaw-May IA
Before Judge BRADY.-DEcIsIoS.
Leary agt. RObers.-Ihe defendant Is entitled to
the relief asked Order be settled TWO dly' notice. BY
Before Judge HILTON
YxAMISATIoS or NOS-REsIDESTs on COMMISSION.
Block a., HAS
The plaiutfT being a nor resident Of the State asks
examine himself and others as witnesses On
Prior 70 the amendments Of the Code April 1850 it
held that this Of uon-residen, party undrf com
mission could not be had unla the opposite parry had s''ch
Motive II his intended examination At the ifl4L
But section 500 Ia. been amended obyae this objection and
o intended examination Of party no longer re-
party may low examined the any other witness
Ard II be- .de ~, # jurisdiction II the court he b:
by commission issued and executed in the usual
Tie motion for commission will therefore be granted costs to
couPEss.IloS FOR TSDoRsENESTs-REFERES
Ha,rIto1 az. Howell
The plaintiff sues 10 recover compensation LOT IN
sbIe Dc pcr tho def ndau 20 enable hun % pro-
cure tie sane T. dicouLtgd, and It IS alleged ili tA "-'
done upon the defendants promise 10 pay reasonable co"p
The pambr Of notes thus iadoed is stated bu. it is
alleged they exceeded twenty and the amount ~" oe
t. dterun. the compensation which the paintis be
entitled under ,hi' agre .usn' 1t "il De nsss' - Vii II
c ~ require tie examination # long account on the
pa f The plaintiff and inye,tiEton win ~, rrgar- me
Ca, h the eour. may order to BE- referred tCode see ~
- ~ c.llCreb AZ. Brrde I3 Howard 36 Dewey AT.
FSd "a j17. RrnsafT sgt Je1yet, III HiI 81 oalS7
Company Hal Z X, 'oJb
Mo1iou Tor reference granted costs % ABIDE event.
COURT OF GENERAL sEssIoSs-MAT 2i-Bef0rs
Judge RUSSELL.
sENIESCEs.
Henry Rice having plead guilty of assault and bat
v "a. seueucsd th. morning the PenitenAs ioT nl@
- ,L. I'd "a, fned O and % remain n Pn.on az ne *
;,,ir II ne uiu mon lbs until hs nopey Po; lac
y vas sad 10 be notorious Perth Ward rV"dJ s-i oon
p,itt.d a very sggraya-d ss.su.t On female . - e.
Tt ma. smith and Peter Dolan, ,rntenee' % nc
s--s~ - n roe year. and he latter tf y years
On ulea Of El,y of ASSAULT and semP9z y toS p.a 80