Pickle-Rite Co. v. Chicago Pickle Co.
United States District Court for the Northern District Illinois
171 F. Supp. 671 (1959)
In August 1956, Pickle-Rite Company (Pickle-Rite) (plaintiff) obtained a trademark registration for the Polka mark, which Pickle-Rite used in connection with the sale of various types of pickles. In December 1956, Chicago Pickle Company (Chicago Pickle) (defendant) started selling its own pickles in bottles under the Pol-Pak mark. Pickle-Rite brought a suit for trademark infringement, arguing that the Pol-Pak mark was confusingly similar to Pickle-Rite’s Polka mark when used in connection with the sale of bottled pickles. Pickle-Rite also claimed that Chicago Pickle willfully infringed upon the Polka mark. Chicago Pickle argued that the two marks were not confusingly similar when compared side by side as they appeared on commercial labels.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Hoffman, J.)
What to do next…
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.
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.