White v. Board of Regents for the University of Nebraska

614 N.W.2d 330 (2000)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

White v. Board of Regents for the University of Nebraska

Nebraska Supreme Court
614 N.W.2d 330 (2000)

Facts

The University of Nebraska at Lincoln (the university) (plaintiff) was a state-supported university located in Lincoln, Nebraska. In 1996, the university’s athletic department began the process of opening a so-called authentic shop in which to sell merchandise to the public. For test marketing purposes, the university distributed a catalog of merchandise options to season ticket holders, boosters, and alumni. In the catalog, the university used a logo with the words “Husker Authentics.” The phrase had not been used by the university prior to this time. In July 1996, the university filed an application with the Nebraska Secretary of State to register “Husker Authentics” as a trade name. Because the university did not follow through on certain publication requirements, the application was cancelled. Brent White (plaintiff) operated two retail stores that sold university merchandise. In 1997, White applied to register the trade name “Husker Authentics” in an attempt to prevent the university from opening its retail store. White had not used the name prior to filing his application. White completed all requirements and was granted registration of the trade name. When the university learned that its trade-name application had been cancelled, it applied to register the trade name “Husker Authentic,” but its application was denied because the name was too close to that registered by White. The university opened its retail store in 1997 using the name “Huskers Authentic.” White filed a lawsuit against the university, seeking an injunction to prevent the university from using the name. The university counterclaimed, arguing, among other things, that White had violated its trade name and trademark rights. The trial court ruled that both White’s and the university’s registration applications were improper because neither had used the name prior to filing their application but also, among other things, refused to issue an injunction against White’s use of the name. Both parties appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Stephan, J.)

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 815,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  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.

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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership