CONVEY
v.
OMAHA NATIONAL BANK

U.S. | 1944-03-06
No. 650
321 U.S. 781 Supreme Court of the United States (1944) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case
Opinion

Full opinion text not available for this case.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Stork Rest., Inc. v. Sahati, 166 F.2d 348 (9th Cir. 1948)
    …of another, the use of the advertising or trade name or distinguishing mark of another, is in its nature, fraudulent and will be enjoined.” In Cleo Syrup Corporation v. Coca-Cola Co., 8 Cir., 139 F. 2d 416, 417, 150 A.L.R. 1056, certiorari denied, 321 U.S. 781, 782, 64 S.Ct. 638, 88 L.Ed. 1074, the court declared that “There is no merit in the contention that a court of equity will not afford protection to the plaintiff’s trade-mark or prevent its good will from being nibbled away by unfair competitors.”…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw