Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Champion Spark Plug Co. v. Sanders

Supreme Court of the United States
331 U.S. 125 (1947)


Facts

Champion Spark Plug Co. (Champion) (plaintiff) manufactured spark plugs bearing the trademark “Champion.” Sanders (defendant) repaired used spark plugs and resold them. Sanders sold the repaired plugs in a box with “Champion” on it, and the print on the box guaranteed that the spark plugs would be dependable. Sanders did include a note inside the box stating that the plugs had been renewed, but none of the boxes used Sanders’s name. Sanders also included Champion’s own charts indicating the recommended uses of the spark plugs. Champion sued Sanders for infringement of the “Champion” trademark and unfair competition. The district court found that Sanders could not sell any of Champion’s plugs unless any reference to Champion’s trademark was removed, the plugs were clearly labeled repaired, and the boxes clearly indicated that the plugs came from Champion but had been repaired by Sanders. The district court decided not to address the unfair competition claim. The decision was appealed. The appeals court found that Sanders was guilty of trademark infringement and unfair competition. The appeals court modified the district court’s ruling such that Sanders did not have to remove Champion’s trademark but had to clearly label the plugs as used or repaired. Also, the boxes did not need to state that the plugs came form Champion and were repaired by Sanders, but only needed to have a more general statement about the plugs being used or repaired. Champion filed for certiorari. The Supreme Court granted certiorari because of a conflict among appeals courts’ rulings.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Douglas, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 176,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.