Putnam Nail Co. v. Bennett’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 3 district ·

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Whether this [the bronzing of nails] is a good trade-mark or not, it is the style of goods adopted by the complainant which the defendants have imitated for the purpose of deceiving, and have deceived, the public thereby, and induced them to buy their goods as the goods of complainant. This is a fraud,—-a substantial charge, which the defendants should be required to answer. Undoubtedly, an unfair and fraudulent competition against the business of complainant, conducted with the intention on the part of defendant to palm cf. its goods as plaintiff’s, would, in a proper case, constitute grounds of relief.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Centaur Co. v. Neathery · Heller & Merz Co. v. Shaver

2. ““The defendants, well knowing the premises, <m<1 that your orator alone possessed the right to bronze horseshoe nail» as a trade-mark, and to sell the same under the trade-name, as above set forth, have willfully disregarded the same, and, intending to deceive purchasers and defraud the public and to injure your orator, have for some time past been engaged, and are still engaged, in the sale of horseshoe nail», not manufactured by your orator, but similar In appearance to those niimuiaetured by your orator, which they have had bronzed and sold as bronzed horse»hoe nails, under the name of ‘Imperial Bronze,’ or other names, all eoiihiiibn»; fue word ‘bronze’; and the said nails, so bronzed and sold by the defemd;! ms under the said name, have been and are of inferior quality to llie nai’s bronzed and sold by your orator under their lawful trade-mark; m:d purchasers and consumers have been and are deceived and misled into buying the articles so bronzed and sold by the defendants in the bolt -f tost they were and are of the manufacture of your orator.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Standard Varnish Works v. Fisher, Thorsen & Co.

3. ““There Is lime ¡t substantial fact stated — that the public and customers have been, by the alleges' conduct of the defendants, deceived and misled into buying the defendants’ nails for the complainant’s. That averment is amplified in paragraph 4 oí’ the bill.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Standard Varnish Works v. Fisher, Thorsen & Co.