New York Supreme Court, 1910

Burrow v. Marcean

Burrow v. Marcean
New York Supreme Court · Decided May 15, 1910 · Gorman
67 Misc. 656; 124 N.Y.S. 810

Counsel

Allen & Sabine, for plaintiff., M. Goodman (Morgan J. O’Brien, of counsel), for defendants.

Burrow v. Marcean

Opinion of the Court

O’Gorman, J.

The evidence, prescribes a clear case of unfair competition which would justify equitable relief if the plaintiff’s own conduct were free from criticism, but the photographic business is in the nature of a profession or calling as distinguished from a trade or mercantile pursuit, and the trade-mark “Sarony” being personal to Napoleon S'arony, because of his personal skill and artistic excellence, was not assignable. When the plaintiff, who is a printer and not a photographer, holds himself out as “ Sarony ” and “the original Sarony” he is perpetrating a fraud upon the public, and in such a case equity will withhold relief. Prince, v. Prince, 134 N. Y. 24; Hegeman v. Hegeman, 8 Daly, 1.

Complaint dismissed, with costs.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.