LANDILETH 22. LANDRETH. 41
Liunnnrn and others v. Lnznnnm.
(Oircuit Oourt, E'. D. Wisconsin. October 27, 1884.) 4
Tnsnn-MARK- Usm on Sunnsun-Psnrrss or Sams: NAME-Dnunmuox mn
Fnsnn——I¤Joucrrou.
While a party cannot he enjoined from honestly using his own name ln ad-
vertising his goods and putting them on the market, where another person,
bearing the same surname, has previously used the name in connection with his
goods in such manner and for such length of time as to make it a guaranty
that the goods bearing the name emanate from him, he will be protected against
the use of that name, even by a person bearing the same name, in such form ·—
as to constitute s, false representation of the origin of the goods, and thereby
inducing purchasers to believe that they are purchasing the goods of such other
person. . » ’
In Equity. `
George Harding and Francis T. Chambers, for complainants.
Nash at Nash, for defendant. ,
Dyna, J. This is a suit for an injunction to restrain the defendant
from using a certain label which the complainants allege they have
adopted as their trade-mark in the sale of a certain variety of seeds
known as "Landreths’ Extra Early Peas." A motion has been made
for a. preliminary injunction, and, at the present stage of the case, I
do not deem it necessary to do more than to announce briefly and
quite informally my conclusions upon certain points concerning which
my mind is free from doubt. There are some questions in the case
upon which more light may be thrown by further and more elaborate
argument, and the disposition of which, I think, should be postponed
until the hearing on the merits. At present, I can hardly think the
defendant has not the right to raise and sell the seed known as
"Landreths’Extra Early Peas;" nor am I now of the opinion that he
should be restrained from putting the peas on the market in bags of
various sizes, fastened in the manner shown, and identified by such a
metallic seal as it appears he now uses.
Further, it is not clear that the defendant has not the right to ad·
vertise his peas as "I.»andreths’ Extra Early Peas," provided he does
so in such manner as to clearly inform the public that the peas are
of his own growth and production. It seems to me this case is not,
accurately speaking, one of trade-mark or trade-name. It is rather
a case in which the question appears to be whether the defendant, by
the use of certain labels or inscriptions on the bags in which his peas
are put upon the market, is not selling his own goods as the goods of
Landreth & Sons, of Philedelphia. The complainants, in 1873,
placed upon their bags and adopted this inscription, printed in blue
ink, and in the following form: