green
Positive treatment
2.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 1960 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1960
1993
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. The J. B. Williams Company, Inc., and Parkson Advertising Agency, Inc.
(2×)
See generally United States v. American Greetings Corp., 168 F.Supp. 45 (N.D.Ohio 1958), aff'd on opinion below, 272 F.2d 945 (6th Cir.1959). 171 Finally, it puts the appellants' notice argument in its true light to recollect as the majority does-- I need no repeat here-- the facts of the administrative proceedings following the Sixth Circuit's denial of the petition to review the cease and desist order which had become final on December 31, 1967.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Paul Smith, an Individual v. Edward L. Montoro and Film Ventures International Inc.
See also United States v. American Greetings Corp., 168 F.Supp. 45 (N.D.Ohio 1958), aff'd, 272 F.2d 945 (6th Cir. 1959) (“implied reverse passing off’); Mastro Plastics v. Emenee Industries, Inc., 32 Misc.2d 801 , 223 N.Y.S.2d 940 (Sup.Ct.1962), rev’d 16 App.Div.2d 420, 228 N.Y.S.2d 514 (App.Div.1962), aff’d mem., 12 N.Y.2d 826 , 236 N.Y.S.2d 347 , 187 N.E.2d 360 (1962), motion to dismiss amended complaint denied, 19 App.Div.2d 600, 240 N.Y.S.2d 624 (1st Dept. 1963), aff’d 14 N.Y.2d 498 , 248 N.Y.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
AMERICAN GREETINGS CORPORATION, Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee
13893.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Dec 31, 1959.
Jones, Day, Cockley & Reavis, Cleveland, Ohio, by Robt. W. Poore, Cleveland, Ohio, for appellant., Russell E. Ake, Cleveland, Ohio, Frank C. McAleer, Atty., Federal Trade Commission, Washington, D. C., for appel-lee.
McAllister, Simons, Brooks.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal of a civil action brought under Section 5(1) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, Title 15, U.S.C.A. § 45(() in which penalties were awarded for violations of a cease and desist order of the Federal Trade Commission. It has been heard upon the record, the briefs and arguments of counsel, and the Court being duly advised:
Now, therefore, it is ordered and adjudged that the judgment of the District[*946] Court be and it is affirmed for the reasons contained in the opinion of the Court reported in 168 F.Supp. 45, 46, also memorandum opinion denying motion for new trial.