Appellee owned and operated a well-known restaurant
On April 28, 2021 by Morthe StandardAppellants challenged a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco (California) which enjoined appellants from using a name on a cocktail sauce and awarded appellee damages in an action where appellee alleged that consumers were mislead as to the manufacturer.
Appellee owned and operated a well-known restaurant. Appellants manufactured and distributed allied products of appellants’ business of packaging and marketing fish. Appellants used their family name on a cocktail sauce. Appellee alleged that the use of the name had led purchasers to believe that the restaurant marketed the product. Los Angeles ADA attorney Appellee sought an injunction and damages. Appellants contended that they had a right to use the family name on the sauce because a family name was incapable of exclusive appropriation and could not be monopolized. The court held that the use of one’s name was not absolute. Appellants were not entitled to use the name in a trademark sense as a means of pirating the good will and reputation of appellee. Appellants had deliberately attempted to confuse and mislead the public as to the producer of the sauce. Appellee was entitled to an injunction and damages.
The court affirmed the judgment and held that, when appellants used a family name in a trademark sense to market a sauce, appellants deliberately attempted to confuse and mislead the public as to the origin of the sauce. Appellee was entitled to damages and a permanent injunction.
Defendants, city and others, appealed a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County (California), which ruled in favor of plaintiff advertisers, declared that certain city ordinances regulating billboards were unconstitutional, and enjoined their enforcement.
The city passed ordinances that limited billboard usage and prohibited the construction of billboards. The advertisers filed a complaint alleging that the ordinances were unconstitutional. The trial court agreed with the advertisers and enjoined the enforcement of the ordinances. On appeal, the court reversed. The sole question presented on appeal was whether or not the trial court erred in determining that the distinction made in the ordinances between “point-of-sale” and “non-point-of-sale” signs rendered them unconstitutional as being discriminatory in classification. The court held that the ordinance merely limited the business of outdoor advertising, as it limited other businesses, to specified districts. The advertisers’ signs were made pursuant to the conduct of the business of outdoor advertising itself, and did not relate to the structure housing a business like an ordinary business sign. The court held that the unique nature of outdoor advertising and the nuisances fostered by billboards and similar outdoor structures justified the separate classification of such structures for the purposes of governmental regulation and restriction.
The court ruled in favor of the city and others and against the advertisers, and reversed the judgment in the action to enjoin enforcement of city billboard ordinances.
Table of Contents
You may also like
Archives
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
Calendar
M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | ||||||
2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 |
23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
30 | 31 |
Categories
- Air Conditioning
- Android
- Apps
- Automobile
- Business
- Computer Forensics
- Computers & Technology
- Computers and Technology
- Data Recovery
- education
- Food Tech
- Gaming
- General
- Hardware
- Health
- Internet
- IOS
- Jewellery
- Mobile App
- More
- News
- Online Marketing
- Personal Tech
- Programming
- Social Media
- Software
- Tech
- Technology
- Web Hosting
- Yahoo