Bronco Wine Co. v. Jolly

Full title: BRONCO WINE COMPANY et al., Petitioners, v. JERRY R. JOLLY, as Director…

Court: California Court of Appeals, Third District, Sacramento

Date published: Jun 20, 2005

No. C037254 (Cal. Ct. App. Jun. 20, 2005)

Opinion

BRONCO WINE COMPANY et al., Petitioners, v. JERRY R. JOLLY, as Director, etc., et al., Respondents NAPA VALLEY VINTNERS ASSOCIATION, Intervener. C037254 California Court of Appeal, Third District, Sacramento June 20, 2005

MODIFICATION OF OPINION AND DENIAL OF PETITION FOR REHEARING

THE COURT:

The opinion of this court filed May 26, 2005, in the above entitled case is modified as follows:

1. On page 15, third line from the bottom, replace “any services� with “the product�, and delete “Moreover, trade names� so that the line reads as follows:

“quality of the product offered and need not�.

2. On page 16, 3rd line, delete “By contrast� and insert the following in its place:

“While a brand name generally does not have intrinsic meaning,�.

3. On page 16, 6th line down, insert the following after “brand name�:

“of geographic significance�.

This modification does not effect a change in the judgment. The petition for rehearing is denied.

BLEASE, Acting P. J., RAYE, J., MORRISON, J.