Mishawaka Rubber & Woolen Manufacturing. Co. v. S.S. Kresge Co.
United States Supreme Court
316 U.S. 203 (1942)

- Written by Sarah Holley, JD
Facts
Mishawaka Rubber & Woolen Manufacturing Co. (plaintiff) manufactured and sold shoes and rubber heels using a registered trademark consisting of a red circular plug embedded in the center of a heel. Mishawaka made considerable efforts to promote the mark as an assurance of a desirable product to potential purchasers. Later, S.S. Kresge Co. (defendant) sold heels bearing a similar mark to that of Mishawaka. Even though there was no evidence of consumer confusion, the district court found there was a reasonable likelihood of consumer confusion, i.e., that some purchasers had been induced into purchasing Kresge’s good on the belief that he or she was obtaining Mishawaka’s good. Concluding that Mishawaka’s mark had been infringed, the district court enjoined further use of the mark and ordered Kresge to account to Mishawaka for profits made from sales to purchasers who had been so induced. Mishawaka appealed the criterion for determining the profits, which the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed. The United States Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Frankfurter, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 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.