The New York herald., 1876-11-23
Use Of an Individual Name as
a Trade Mark.
The Suit of Edwin Booth Against
Jarrett & Palmer.
AN OLD GENTLEMANS EXPENSIVE SPREE.
A Litigation Over Ferry
Leases.

In Special Term OF the Court OF Common Pleas,
yesterday. before Judge Van Brunt argument was
partially heard motion behalf OF Edwin Booth,
TO restrain Jarrett Palmer from continuing to use
The name of "Booth's in connection with the theatre
IN the corner OF Sixth and Twenty third
street. 1t is claimed by Mr. Booth his
purpose was only to associate his name
with tho theatre long he inter-
ested therein: that his interest in and connection
herewith has long since ceased; that the
continuance of his name in connection there
with rs against his wish, in defiance of his pro-
test in prejudice OF his rights and in violation of law
Upon these grounds he commenced suit in equity
against Jarrett Palmer IN which he asks Tor $4,000
damages for the unauthorized use OF his name and for
perpetual Injunction restraining the defendants from
It's iurther use in connection with the theatre.
Mr Luxe A. Lockwood, counsel Tor Mr. Booth,
briefly stated the behalf OF the motion
citing the facts OF which the foregoing the sub
stance. and claiming as matter OF law that plaintiff had
she sole right 10 the use of his name in connection
with the theatre that as he had authorized
ono TO use 1t the defendants wero making such uso
without authority of law; that beng In the nature oil
radc mark, as used in connection with the theatre,
was entitled TO protection us such and the temporary
Injunction asked for should issue in his favor.
Tho answer OF the defendants, as submitted by
Messrs Baker X Russell. their counsel after deny
Ing most OF the plaintiffs allegations some with
knowledge and others for want OF sufficient
the facts alleged, sets up as an affirmative defence,
that in January, 1873, plaintiff made lease of the
theatre to Junius b. Booth, under the designation Of
"Booth's" Theatre; that ir April, 1874 the deicn-
dans, with tho knowledge and assent OF the plaintiff
and all parties interested therein through him.
ccpted an assignment OF the lease TO Junus b. Booth
such assignment beng taken under the order and
direction OF the Supreme Court to tho then Of
the property that NJ the time Of such assignment the
plaintiff well knew the fact TO be that the theatre had
Continued to be known and designated as ssBoothsn
Theatre from the time of his leasing II to
Junins i. Booth, and that no planun) fully
sop Of m Hoobs Tasare ana S ass'r b
time defendants took possession OF the theatre
not only known and designated as g Boohsn Theatre,
hntu ldpr fhut haI itS MI
over the city, IN all OF which plaintiff acquesced;
that plaintiff is not tho only person whose Is
"Booth, and is not entitled 10, nor has he the right
10 control the OF the same and that at the time of
the commencenen OF the action he had no legal right
20 the name OF " Booth, applied In connection with
said theaire under the control OF the defendants
both sides aicavits submitted in relation to the
motion for temporary injunction, those the part
OF Mr.. Booth alleging that the public constantly
being deceived and miscd by the Of his name and
that ne is thereby al any time liable TO suffer in his
reputation as an actor as well as In his financial inter-
ests those on the part OF defendants contradcting
such allegations.
Mr. Benjamin +. Resell further contended that the
plaintiff never had the sole and exclusive OF the
name OF "Booth' II having been The name OF his
father known for than sixty years actor Of
genius, and In whose honor the theatre might have
we'll been named by any one Alluslon was also made
10 the leases aud the wording thereof The argument
has not concluded when tho Court adjourned
AN OLD MANS $4,000 SPREE.
There tried in the Marine Court before Judge
Eocpp and jury, yesterday case which brings back
10 the mind Of Martin Cunning man of perhaps sixty
years. somewhat unpo recolectons OF more than
. year ago. In March, 1875, Cunning fell into company
with Eleanor Young He had with him about 81 000 and
started out with tho apparent intention OF treating and
sFccng her and himself with a degree OF liberality
pronortonao to his ready cash. She, however the
criminal records show, got the best of HIM for tho
time being, as she druggcd him, took him on q
trip TO Boston. and finally wound up by robbing
HIM OF about 81, 800 In this city. For this
sho was arrested. and on the day after
brough, her dinner. Sergeant Carpenter, in the
OF tho doorkecper carried the dinner to Elean
or's CELL Eleanor inquired who brought IT, and learn
ing who It was, she said that no more to blame
shan she the robbery and that he had orciby taken
$500 Of the money out OF her bosom. Upon this in
formation tho Sergeant put Young Thompson he did
know which. under arrest. the latter stating In
denial OF the charge that the money the womans
own; that she had given to him voluntarily and he
had put II in the bank. On tho following morning he
was brought before tho magistrate and che also rs
witness but on oath she then denied that he had forci
bly, taken the money IRON her. and he discharged.
rhe magistrate however directed that tho bank book,
showing tho deposit OF tho money In tho
The custody OF tho Property Clerk. Tho
erring Eleanor subsequently went TO state Prison,
alias Thompson. both laid claim to the bank book. 70
determine the tite 10 this was the object OF the suit
tried yesterday and during the hearing the foregoing
tacts were disclosed ON part OF Young VINO sues
under the oi George Young, but who the polico
know James Thompson, IT Is claimed thai the old
man Cunning became infatuated with Eleanor; that
voluntarily took her Boston ana there her;
that he gave her the money voluntarily; that month
alter he repented, and being married and fear
sgainst the OF having drusged and robbed him.
and her State Prison in his stead. The Is
Btill on trial.
SUMMARY OF LAW CASES.