Euroquilt, Inc. v. Scandia Down Corp., 475 U.S. 1147 (1986). · Go Syfert
Search
Euroquilt, Inc. v. Scandia Down Corp., 475 U.S. 1147 (1986). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 1988 · …prejudgment interest ... is in the nature of compensation for the use of funds. ⚠ not in text
104 citation events (6 in the last 25 years) across 23 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: U.S. Industries, Inc. v. Touche Ross & Co. (ca10, 1988-08-22) · Strongest negative: RE Phelon Co., Inc. v. Wabash, Inc. (innd, 1986-07-09)
Treatment trajectory · 1986 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1986 2006 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "but see" RE Phelon Co., Inc. v. Wabash, Inc.
N.D. Ind. · 1986 · signal: but see · confidence high
La.1985); but see, Scandia Down Corp. v. Euroquilt, Inc., 772 F.2d 1423 , 227 USPQ 138 (7th Cir.1985), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 106 S.Ct. 1801 , 90 L.Ed.2d 346 (1986).
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) U.S. Industries, Inc. v. Touche Ross & Co.
10th Cir. · 1988 · signal: see also · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
prejudgment interest ... is in the nature of compensation for the use of funds.
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) U.S. Industries, Inc. v. Touche Ross & Co.
10th Cir. · 1988 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
prejudgment interest ... is in the nature of compensation for the use of funds.
discussed Cited "see" Pro-Football, Inc. v. Harjo (2×)
D.D.C. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See Scandia Down Corp. v. Euroquilt, Inc., 772 F.2d 1423, 1427-29 (7th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1147 , 106 S.Ct. 1801 , 90 L.Ed.2d 346 (1986).
discussed Cited "see" Howard Johnson Company, Inc. v. Amir Khimani (2×)
11th Cir. · 1990 · signal: see · confidence high
They must do more than see how close they can come with safety to that which they are enjoined from doing. 20 Eskay Drugs v. Smith, Kline & French Laboratories, 188 F.2d 430, 432 (5th Cir.1951); see Scandia Down Corp. v. Euorquilt, Inc., 772 F.2d 1423, 1432 (7th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1147 , 106 S.Ct. 1801 , 90 L.Ed.2d 346 (1986) (district courts in trademark cases "possess[ ] substantial discretion to decide how close is too close, once an infringer has committed a contempt of the original injunction"); World's Finest Chocolate, Inc. v. World Candies, Inc., 409 F.Supp. 840, 844 (N.…
discussed Cited "see" Howard Johnson Co. v. Khimani (2×)
11th Cir. · 1990 · signal: see · confidence high
Eskay Drugs v. Smith, Kline & French Laboratories, 188 F.2d 430, 432 (5th Cir.1951); see Scandia Down Corp. v. Euorquilt, Inc., 772 F.2d 1423, 1432 (7th Cir.1985), ce rt. denied, 475 U.S. 1147 , 106 S.Ct. 1801 , 90 L.Ed.2d 346 (1986) (district courts in trademark cases “possess[] substantial discretion to decide how close is too close, once an infringer has committed a contempt of the original injunction”); World’s Finest Chocolate, Inc. v. World Candies, Inc., 409 F.Supp. 840, 844 (N.D.Ill.1976), aff'd, 559 F.2d 1226 (7th Cir.1977) (“It is well established that the protection of a tra…
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Dennis Kaun (2×)
7th Cir. · 1987 · signal: see · confidence high
An injunction may be set aside on appeal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(d) if it is not “specific in terms” or fails to “describe in reasonable detail ... the act or acts sought to be restrained.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 65(d); see Scandia Down Corp. v. Euroquilt, Inc., 772 F.2d 1423, 1431 (7th Cir.1985), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 106 S.Ct. 1801 , 90 L.Ed.2d 346 (1986).
discussed Cited "see" Har-Bur Associates v. Docktor Pet Centers, Inc. (2×)
E.D. Pa. · 1986 · signal: see · confidence high
See Scandia Down Corp. v. Euroquilt, Inc., 772 F.2d 1423 (7th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1147 , 106 S.Ct. 1801 , 90 L.Ed.2d 346 (1986); Litton Systems, Inc. v. Whirlpool Corp., 728 F.2d 1423 (Fed.Cir.1984); Sarah Coventry, Inc. v. T.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Cartagena v. Challenger Columbia, Inc.
S.D.N.Y. · 1988 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Chung, Yong Il v. Overseas Navigation Co., 774 F.2d 1043, 1056 (11th Cir. 1985) (“Although an admiralty court has discretion to grant or deny prejudgment interest, the general rule in admiralty cases is that prejudgment interest should be awarded absent peculiar circumstances”), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1147 , 106 S.Ct. 1802 , 90 L.Ed.2d 346 (1986).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." G. Heileman Brewing Co. v. Anheuser-Busch Inc. (2×)
E.D. Wis. · 1987 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Scandia Down Corporation v. Euroquilt, Inc., 772 F.2d 1423 , 1431 n. 3 (7th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1147 , 106 S.Ct. 1801 , 90 L.Ed.2d 346 (1986); Walt-West Enterprises, Inc. v. Gannett Company, Inc., 695 F.2d 1050, 1057 (7th Cir.1982).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Euroquilt, Inc.
v.
Scandia Down Corp.
No. 85-1038.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 28, 1986.
475 U.S. 1147
White.
Cited by 53 opinions  |  Published
1 passages pin-cited by 2 cases
Pinpoint authority: bottom 88%
Citer courts: Tenth Circuit (2)

Lead Opinion

C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Dissent

Justice White,

dissenting.

One of the questions presented by this case is whether, in a trademark infringement action under § 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U. S. C. § 1125(a), a district court’s finding of “likelihood of confusion” is reviewable under the “clearly erroneous” standard, as a finding of fact, or de novo, as a conclusion of law. As I have previously noted, the Courts of Appeals are divided on this question. Elby’s Big Boy of Steubenville, Inc. v. Frisch’s Restaurants, Inc., 459 U. S. 916 (1982) (White, J., dissenting from denial of certiorari). I would grant certiorari to resolve this conflict.