Burger King of Florida, Inc. v. Hoots
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
403 F.2d 904 (1968)
- Written by Emily Houde, JD
Facts
Burger King of Florida, Inc. (Burger King) (plaintiff) opened its first restaurant, called Burger King, in Florida in 1953 and expanded to Illinois in 1961. Hoots (defendant) had opened its first Burger King restaurant in Mattoon, Illinois in 1957 and registered the trademark “Burger King” under the Illinois Trade Mark Act. At the time, Hoots did not have notice of Burger King’s use of the same mark outside of Illinois. However, Burger King had notice of Hoots’s registration when it opened its first restaurant in Illinois in 1961. Burger King registered the trademark “Burger King” on the federal register in 1961. By 1967, Burger King had over fifty restaurants in Illinois. Hoots had only opened one other restaurant in Charleston, Illinois, in 1962. Hoots opened this restaurant with constructive knowledge of Burger King’s federal trademark. Hoots sued Burger King in state court, and Burger King sued Hoots in federal court for violation of its federal trademark. Hoots counter-claimed, requesting an injunction because of Burger King’s violation of Hoots’s state trademark. The district court found that Burger King’s property right in the trademark was superior to Hoots’s because of the natural expansion of Burger King’s business throughout Illinois but that Hoots still had the right to use its trademark in the area in which it first adopted it innocently without notice of Burger King’s competing trademark. Hoots appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kiley, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 812,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.