U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, 1912

L. E. Waterman Co. v. Modern Pen Co.

L. E. Waterman Co. v. Modern Pen Co.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Decided June 7, 1912 · Hoft, Noyes, Ward
197 F. 536; 1912 U.S. App. LEXIS 1311; 117 C.C.A. 32

L. E. Waterman Co. v. Modern Pen Co.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

It is equitable that the penholders which the defendant has in good faith marked in accordance with Judge Hand’s-decree with the .suffix “not connected with the original Waterman 'pen,” or in accordance with the opinion of. this court before the use of the name “Arthur” was required, should • be permitted to be; sold and the order for the mandate may so provide.

The application for further changes in the order is denied.

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