U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, 1958

Carlton Lamp Corporation v. General Electric Company

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Decided May 20, 1958 · Goodrich, Hastie

254 F.2d 815; 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 5857; 1958 Trade Cas. (CCH) 69,076 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Bernard Hellring, Newark, N. J. (Leonard Lieberman, Newark, N. J., on the brief), for appellant., Albert C. Bickford, New York City (Henry W. Lauterstein, N^w York City, on the brief), for appellee.

Cases that cite this one

5 later published cases cite this decision.

Conard v. Stitzel (District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania 1963)
Farbenfabriken Bayer, A. G. v. Sterling Drug Inc. (District Court, D. New Jersey 1961)
George F. Powell v. St. Louis Dairy Company, a Corporation (8th Cir. 1960)
Skouras Theatres Corp. v. Radio-Keith-Orpheum Corp. (District Court, S.D. New York 1959)
Pearl H. Kowalewski, Widow of Anthony Kowalewski, Deceased v. The Pennsylvania Railroad Company, a Corporation of the State of Pennsylvania (3d Cir. 1958)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this case, as in Dean Oil Company v. American Oil Company, 3 Cir., 254 F.2d 816, the plaintiff would be glad to have us overrule our decision in Gordon v. Loew’s Inc., 1957, 247 F.2d 451. Failing in this he with great ingenuity suggests a theory by which our decision m the Gordon case would not be applicable. Giving counsel credit for great resourcefulness, we still do not see the force of the attempted distinction. We, therefore, will affirm on the authority of the Gordon case.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

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