From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dobbs Co. v. Cobbs Haberdasher, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 18, 1929
226 App. Div. 372 (N.Y. App. Div. 1929)

Opinion

June 18, 1929.

Appeal from Supreme Court of New York County.

Thomas McErlean of counsel [ Briesen Schrenk, attorneys], for the appellant.

Michael I. Winter of counsel [ Benjamin B. Weinberg, attorney], for the respondent.

Present — DOWLING, P.J., MERRELL, FINCH, McAVOY and PROSKAUER, JJ.


It is entirely apparent to this court that the defendant, a competitor of plaintiff, has adopted its corporate name with a view of profiting from the long-established and successful business of plaintiff. No person of the name of "Cobbs" is connected with the defendant corporation and no excuse is offered for the adoption of such name, and the use of the name "Cobbs" by the defendant will, in our opinion, result in serious confusion of trade and deception of the public, and the adoption and use by defendant of a name so similar to plaintiff's trade name, in our opinion, constitutes an act of unfair competition. The defendant should be restrained from using the name "Cobbs" in any form whatsoever, whether alone or in conjunction with the defendant's corporate title.

The order so far as appealed from should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion in all respects granted.


Order, so far as appealed from reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion in all respects granted. Settle order on notice.


Summaries of

Dobbs Co. v. Cobbs Haberdasher, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 18, 1929
226 App. Div. 372 (N.Y. App. Div. 1929)
Case details for

Dobbs Co. v. Cobbs Haberdasher, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:DOBBS COMPANY, Appellant, v. COBBS HABERDASHER, INC., Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jun 18, 1929

Citations

226 App. Div. 372 (N.Y. App. Div. 1929)
235 N.Y.S. 422

Citing Cases

Nu Enamel Corp. v. Nate Enamel Co.

The courts of this State and sister States have uniformly restrained acts of unfair competition much less…

Miles Shoes of N.Y., Inc., v. Niles Bootery, Inc.

"There cannot be the slightest doubt that the word `Aero' was deliberately selected by defendants for the…