Tomsky

Tomsky v. Clark

Good Law
1925 Cal. App. LEXIS 252·73 Cal. App. 412·238 P. 950
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 29, 1925Docket No. 4920.California2,560 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Knight, J.

Plaintiffs, Samuel C. Tomsky and Lee Andrew Cole, as copartners doing business under the firm name of Eauer Collection Company, and the corporate defendant, Eauer’s Law and Collection Company, Inc., of which the individual defendants Eoy E. Clark, J. J. Eauer and H. S. Smith are officers and stockholders, are engaged in the same kind of business in the city and county of San Francisco, that of collecting debts. Plaintiffs commenced this action to enjoin said defendants from using the name “Rauer’s Law and Collection Company, Inc.” in connection with said corporate defendant’s business. All defendants, excepting Eauer, joined in an answer denying certain allegations of the complaint and interposing two special defenses. The defendant Eauer answered separately, and besides denying material allegations of the complaint, added a cross-complaint asking that plaintiffs be restrained from using the name “Eauer” in connection with plaintiffs’ business. The trial court found generally in favor of the defendants and gave judgment denying the relief prayed for in plaintiffs’ complaint, and enjoining plaintiffs from using the name of Eauer in connection with their business. Plain tiffs have…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.