4 Stock. 182Hilton v. Hilton (1918)
<p>1. The right of a man to use his own name in his own business is part of the natural and inalienable rights guaranteed by our constitution without which the right to acquire, possess and protect property would be of little worth. Even in a case of unfair competition, the courts go no further than to restrain the use of a name except when so marked as to distinguish it from a competitor, and this exception amounts to allowing the wrongdoer to continue the use of his own name when it is so marked.</p> <p>2. The remedy by injunction in a case of unfair competition is a protective remedy intended to protect the complainant in his property rights, not punitive to punish wrong doing.</p> <p>3. When partners dissolve and put their agreement in writing, that writing measures their rights and obligations.</p> <p>4. In an agreement of dissolution between partners, there was a sale of the good will of the business, but no agreement by the retiring partner not to engage in business. — Held, that the retiring partner might carry on a rival business wherever he chose, and might push his business as any stranger or outsider might, even though this interferes with the business he has sold. Newark Goal Co. v. Spangler, 51¡ N. J. Eq. 354, approved.</p> <p>5. The vendor of the good will of a business who has not covenanted or agreed not to compete, may seek for trade by any honest method, including public advertisement or private advertisement, among those who were not customers of the old business, but may not specially solicit the trade of those who were customers of the old business, and he may serve all who come of their own motion.</p>
