Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
P was engaged in the manufacture of flour, sold under the name of 'Tea Rose' flour, in a wrapping with distinctive markings, including the words 'Tea Rose' and a design containing three roses imprinted upon labels attached to sacks and barrels. P had marketed its flour in the State of Alabama for the preceding twelve years, with annual sales of more than $175,000 of Tea Rose flour in that State, and had established a valuable reputation for the name 'Tea Rose' and the distinctive wrappings in Alabama and other States, particularly Georgia and Florida. P alleged that Metcalf (D) was selling flour from the Steeleville Milling Company, in packages and wrappings substantially identical with P's and bearing a design containing three roses and the name 'Tea Rose' upon the labels. D denied any attempts to deceive purchasers, and further denied complainant's right to the exclusive use of the words 'Tea Rose' or the picture of a rose as a trade-mark. As early as 1872, the name had been adopted, appropriated, and used as a trade-mark for flour by the firm of Allen & Wheeler, of Troy, Ohio, and used by it and its successor, The Allen & Wheeler Company, continuously as such; and alleged that the Steeleville Milling Company had used its 'Tea Rose' brand for more than sixteen years last past, and as early as the year 1899 had sold flour in Alabama under that label The District Court granted a temporary injunction restraining D. The Circuit Court of Appeals reversed this decree and remanded the cause with directions to dismiss the bill.
The Allen & Wheeler Company (D), a corporation of the State of Ohio, filed a bill against P that it adopted as a trade-mark for designating one of its brands the words 'Tea Rose,' and from thence until the year 1904 continuously used that trade-mark by placing it upon sacks, barrels, and packages containing the brand and quality of flour designated by that term and sold throughout the United States. Wheeler (D) claimed that the words 'Tea Rose' had become the common-law trade-mark for them. Wheeler (D) asked for an injunction and an accounting of profits. P filed a demurrer, and the District Court granted a temporary injunction restraining the use of the words 'Tea Rose' as a trademark for flour, without territorial restriction. The Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reversed this decree and remanded the cause. P appealed to the Supreme Court.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co