Document: 386 U.S. 714 87 S.Ct. 1404 18 L.Ed.2d 475 The FLEISCHMANN DISTILLING CORPORATION et al., Petitioners,v.MAIER BREWING CO. al. No. 214. Argued Feb. 14, 1967. Decided May 8, Moses Lasky, San Francisco, Cal., for peit ioners. J. Albert Hutchinson, respondents. Mr. Chief Justice WARREN delivered the opinion of Court. 1 This is a trademark case arising under Lanham Act (60 Stat. 427, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051—1127) in which our sole concern with relief that may be granted when deliberate infringement valid has been established. question whether federal courts have power context to award reasonable attorney's fees as separate element recovery light § 35 enumerates available compensatory remedies.1 2 scope petitioners'2 and fact respondents'3 were determined by Court Appeals Ninth Circuit at an earlier stage this litigation. 314 F.2d 149, cert. denied, 374 830, 83 1870, 10 1053 (1963). was then remanded District Southern California which, after noting had characterized respondents' infringing activities deliberate, entered its own finding effect. In accord prior rulings certain appeals4 district courts5 could recovered if or willful established, awarded petitioners $60,000 determining such sum constituted prosecution Respondents sought immediate interlocutory appeal although petitioners' rights accounting other remained determination. first dismissed premature, but issued certificate 28 1292(b)6 authorization granted. Sitting en banc reversed fees, holding are without make awards. 359 156 (1966). We certiorari resolve conflict between decisions upon relied. 385 809, 56, 17 51 For reasons elaborated below, we affirm. 3 As early 1278, England authorized counsel successful plaintiffs litigation.7 Similarly, since 1607 English empowered defendants all actions where awards might made plaintiffs.8 Rules governing administration these related provisions developed over years. It now customary England, litigation substantive claims terminated, conduct hearings before special 'taxing Masters' order determine appropriateness size fees. To prevent ancillary proceedings from becoming unduly protracted burdensome, included usually prescribed, even including amounts letters drafted on behalf client.9 4 Although some American commentators urged adoption practice country,10 generally resisted any movement direction. rule here long not ordinarily recoverable absence statute enforceable contract providing therefor. announced Arcambel v. Wiseman, Dall. 306, L.Ed. 613 (1796), adhered it later decisions. See, e.g., Hauenstein Lynham, 100 483, 25 628 (1880); Stewart Sonneborn, 98 187, 116 (1879); Oelrichs Spain, Wall. 211, 21 43 (1872); Day Woodworth, 13 How. 363, 14 181 (1852). support rule, argued best uncertain one should penalized merely defending prosecuting lawsuit, poor unjustly discouraged instituting vindicate their penalty losing opponents' counsel. Cf. Farmer Arabian Oil Co., 379 227, 235, 85 411, 416, 248 (1964); id., 236—239, 417—418 (concurring Goldberg). Also, time, expense, difficulties proof inherent litigating what constitutes would pose substantial burdens judicial administration. supra, 231. 5 Limited exceptions have, course, developed.11 They sanctioned overriding considerations justice seemed compel result. appropriate circumstances, held, admiralty plaintiff item damages (not cost taxed). Vaughan Atkinson, 369 527, 82 997, 8 88 (1962). And civil contempt action occasioned disobedience court part fine levied defendant. Toledo Scale Co. Computing 261 399, 426—428, 458, 465, 466, 67 719 (1923). place principal reliance— Sprague Ticonic National Bank, 307 161, 59 777, 1184 (1939)—involved yet another exception. That exception previously applied cases traced created common fund benefit others well himself. Central Railroad & Banking Pettus, 113 116, 387, 915 (1885); Trustees Greenough, 105 26 1157 (1882). situation allowed obtain full plaintiff's efforts requiring contribution charging enrich expense plaintiff. itself involved variation common-fund where, technical sense sued create fund, stare decisis effect judgment obtained established matter law right discernible class persons collect similar claims. held general equity 'to do particular situation' supported circumstances same underlay 6 recognized not, however, statutory causes legislature prescribed intricate remedies. Trademark occur setting. For, Act, Congress meticulously detailed remedies who proves his infringed. provided only injunctive relief,12 also measured profits accrued defendant virtue infringement, costs action, trebled circumstances.13 Petitioners advanced proposition authority 'costs action' taken together introductory phrase 'subject principles equity' deemed implicit reference power. But none present here. Moreover, since, docket fee 1923(a),14 definition term 'costs' does include fees,15 acceptance argument require u t o ascribe purpose vary meaning either language legislative history unusual construction. When cause expressly provides vindication cause, readily implied. Philp Nock, 460, 679 (1873); Teese Huntingdon, 23 2, 16 479 (1860); cf. overturned specific consequence allowing patent cases16 selectively remedy connection various action.17 several attempts introduce provision into failed enactment.18 therefore must conclude intended mark boundaries monetary Act. A judicially addition express inappropriate context. 7 Affirmed. STEWART, dissenting. 9 Until case, every faced issue upheld cases.1 overrule unbroken line authority, I satisfied clearly declared awarded. Court's convince me declaration.2 enough say did provide original subsequently amended authorize allowance. There many rejecting kind approach interpretation case. acknowledges pre-Lanham decision—Aladdin Mfg. Mantle Lamp 708 (C.A.7th Cir.)—held action.3 seems assume grant equity'4 aware Aladdin decision preserve Other view underlying congressional intent. example, provides: 11 'If shall find amount based inadequate excessive discretion enter just, according case.'5 12 Allowing consider 'circumstances case' arrive hardly comports rigidly limited cannot say, provisions, sub silentio case.6 declined amend explicitly determinative. can assumed known consistently exercising Act's passage. failure away speaks loudly recognition pass bills referred contrary conclusion. respectfully dissent. Section 1117: 'When violation registrant registered Patent Office chapter, entitled, subject sections 1111 1114 title, equity, recover (1) defendant's profits, (2) sustained plaintiff, (3) action. * assessing judgment, above found actual damages, exceeding three times amount. If Such constitute compensation penalty.' Fleischmann Distilling Corporation owns distribution Scotch whiskey sold 'Black White.' Its co-petitioner James Buchanan Ltd., owner trademark. Maier Brewing Company, respondent, independent brewery marketed beer label White' through co-respondent, Ralphs Grocery Company. E.g., Baker Simmons 325 580 (C.A.1st Cir. 1963); Wolfe Lead 272 867 (C.A.9th 1959); Keller Products Rubber Linings Corp., 213 382, 47 A.L.R.2d 1108 1954); Century Continental 205 140 (C.A.3d 1953); Admiral Corp. Penco, Inc., 203 517 (C.A.2d 1953).As pointed out, upholding most instances state conclusion cite often commencing 1941). Youthform R. H. Macy 153 F.Supp. (D.C.N.D.Ga.1957); Williamson-Dickie Davis 149 852 (D.C.E.D.Pa.1957); Francis Leggett Premier Packing 328 (D.C.Mass.1956); Singer Upholstering Sewing 130 (D.C.W.D.Pa.1955). judge, making otherwise appealable section, involves controlling there ground difference materially advance ultimate termination litigation, he so writing order. thereupon, discretion, permit order, application within ten days entry *.' Statute Gloucester, Edw. 1, c. 1. statute, mentioned 'the writ purchased,' outset liberally construed encompass legal suit, Goodhart, Costs, 38 Yale L.J. 849, (1929). Westminster, 1607, Jac. 3. See McCormick, Damages 60 (1935); 849—872 (1929) (passim). Ehrenzwei, Reimbursement Counsel Fees Great Society, 54 Calif.L.Rev. 792 (1966); Expenses Litigation Element Damages, Minn.L.Rev. 619 (1931); Stoebuck, Included Costs: Logical Development, Colo.L.Rev. 202 Note, 65 Mich.L.Rev. 593 (1967). 1923(a), derived Fee Bill 1853, termed 'general exception.' nominal sums 'Attorney's proctor's fees.' ordinary 'on trial final hearing' $20, taxed defined 1920. 34 439, 1116. 1117 (quoted, n. 1). 11, supra. 1920 'A judge clerk United States tax following: '(1) marshal; '(2) reporter stenographic transcript necessarily use case; '(3) disbursements printing witnesses; '(4) exemplification copies papers '(5) Docket section 1923 title. bill filed and, allowance, decree.' 285. enacted 1946, 778. revised 1952, limit 'exceptional cases.' 66 813. Clayton 4, 731, 15; Communications 1934, 206, 48 1072, 206; Copyright 116; Fair Labor Standards 16(b), 52 1069, 29 216(b); Interstate Commerce 16, 590, 49 16(2); Packers Stockyards 309(f), 42 166, 210(f); Perishable Agricultural Commodities 7(b), 46 535, 499g(b); Railway First (p), 1192, 45 (p); Securities 1933, 11(e), 907, 77k(e); Exchange 9(e), 18(a), 890, 897, 78i(e), 78r(a); Servicemen's Readjustment 1822(b); Trust Indenture 323(a), 53 1176, 77www(a). Fed.Rules Civ.Proc. 37(a) 56(g). S. 2540, 83d Cong., 1st Sess., (1953), containing passed Senate enactment House Representatives. Report accompanying stated parallel recent statute. (See supra.) embodied H.R. 7734, 84th (1955), died passing originating House. Footnotes opinion, ante, pp. 715-716, set out copious supporting awrd circumstances. involve 'adoption country,' simply awarding repudiated. 4. 1117. Ibid. reasoning A. Smith Bowman Distillery, Inc. Schenley Distillers, 204 374, 377: 'Mere silence inaction repealed well-established Even though integrated comprehensive rules regulation exclusion conflicting rules, retention discretionary fixing seem threat inconsistency implication pre-empted Some more positive necessary indicate Congressional intent regulate orthodox function.' (Footnote omitted.)

Category: 5