1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. A.D.2d
  4. 3 A.D.2d
  5. 3 A.D.2d 475 (1957)
 

MATTER OF FISCHER SPRING CO. v. FISCHER

3 A.D.2d 475 (1957)

In the Matter of Fischer Spring Company, Inc., Respondent, v. Emanuel M. Fischer, Doing Business under the Name of Chas. Fischer Spring Co. and/or E. M. Fischer Springs, Appellant

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.

May 7, 1957.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Charles Trynin for appellant.

Herbert S. Meeker of counsel (Upham & Meeker, attorneys), for respondent.

BREITEL, J. P., BOTEIN, RABIN and BERGAN, JJ., concur.

Per Curiam.

An established intent to deceive is the controlling consideration in granting the summary remedy authorized by section 964 of the Penal Law restraining by injunction the use of a corporate or trade name.

This intent may be established by affidavit or by proof in other forms received by the court; but the summary relief should be granted only where there is no substantial controversy of fact. (

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases