1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 588 F.Supp.
  5. 588 F.Supp. 1082 (1984)
 

PROCTER & GAMBLE CO. v. CHESEBROUGH-POND'S INC.

No. 84 Civ. 0093 (GLG).

588 F.Supp. 1082 (1984)

The PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. CHESEBROUGH-POND'S INC., Defendant. CHESEBROUGH-POND'S INC., Plaintiff, v. The PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY and Benton & Bowles, Inc., Defendants.

United States District Court, S.D. New York.

June 11, 1984.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Kramer, Levin, Nessen, Kamin & Frankel, New York City, for The Procter & Gamble Co. and Benton & Bowles, Inc.; Harold P. Weinberger, Geoffrey M. Kalmus, Greg A. Danilow, New York City, and Thomas R. Hillhouse, Cincinnati, Ohio, of counsel.

Proskauer, Rose, Goetz & Mendelsohn, New York City, Hyman, Phelps & McNamara, P.C., Washington, D.C., for Chesebrough-Pond's Inc.; Jeffrey B. Schreier, New York City, James R. Phelps, Thomas J. Donegan, Jr., Washington, D.C., and Arnold I. Friede, Greenwich, Conn., of counsel.

OPINION

GOETTEL, District Judge:

Advertising is a pervasive part of modern life. We are confronted with it wherever we turn. Most of us do not take advertising too seriously.1 Those who do are the advertisers themselves, particularly when their competitors make comparative claims of superiority which may influence consumer purchases.

In these actions, two of the nation's largest consumer product manufacturers, The Procter...

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