UNITED PROFIT SHARING CORP.

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• City OF Detroit v. Grinnell Corp., 495 F.2d 448 (2d Cir. 1974)
  …determining whether the proposed settlement is reasonable [citing Neuwirth v. Allen, 338 F. 2d 2 (2d Cir. 1964)]. 447 F. 2d at 433. See also In re Riggi Brothers Co., 42 F. 2d 174, 176 (2d Cir.), cert. denied sub nom., Wood & Selick, Inc. v. Todd, 282 U.S. 881, 51 S.Ct. 85, 75 L.Ed. 777 (1930). When a District Court exercises its authority in approving a settlement offer, it must give comprehensive consideration to all relevant factors and yet the settlement hearing must not be turned into a trial or a re…
• Alonso Menendez v. Saks & Co., 485 F.2d 1355 (2d Cir. 1973)
  …such cigars, they no longer retain any enforceable rights in the trademarks. The sole authority of [*1377] fered in support of this novel theory is our decision in Mulhens and Kropff Inc. v. Muehlens Inc., 43 F. 2d 937 (2d Cir. 1930), cert. denied, 282 U.S. 881, 51 S.Ct. 84, 75 L.Ed. 777, holding that, where a trademark is associated with a product containing an ingredient made according to a secret formula and the holder of the mark applies it to a spurious or counterfeit product not containing the essent…
• Patterson v. Stovall, 528 F.2d 108 (7th Cir. 1976)
  …rial judge should not attempt to decide the merits of the controversy where the parties have reached a settlement. Any virtue which may reside in a compromise is based upon doing away with the effect of such a decision. Woods & Selick, Inc. v. Todd, 282 U.S. 881, 51 S.Ct. 85, 75 L.Ed. 777 (1930); Schleiff v. Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Co., 43 F.R.D. 175, 178-179 (S.D.N.Y.1967); City of Detroit v. Grinnel Corp., 495 F. 2d 448 (2d Cir. 1974); “Factors Considered in Determining the Fairness of a Settlement,” 68 N.U…