Mosler Safe Co. v. Ely-Norris Safe Co. case brief

Mosler Safe Co. v. Ely-Norris Safe Co. case brief summary
273 U.S. 132 (1926)

CASE SYNOPSIS

Certiorari was granted to review a judgment from the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which reversed a decree dismissing petitioner's bill to enjoin alleged unfair competition by respondent and held that petitioner had the monopoly of explosion chambers and respondent falsely represented that its safes had such chambers.

DISCUSSION

• The United States Supreme Court reversed a judgment holding that petitioner had the monopoly of explosion chambers and respondent falsely represented that its safes had such chambers in petitioner's bill to enjoin alleged unfair competition. 
• The Court noted that petitioner complained only of false representations as to safes that did not infringe but that were sold as having explosion chambers although in fact they did not. 
• There were other safes with explosion chambers beside that for which petitioner had a patent. Respondent was charged only with representing that its safes had an explosion chamber, which it had a perfect right to do if the representation was true. 
• If on the other hand the representation was false as it was alleged sometimes to have been, there was nothing to show that customers had they known the facts would have gone to petitioner rather than to other competitors in the market, or to lay a foundation for the claim for a loss of sales. 
• Petitioner was excluded from the right to complain.

CONCLUSION
The judgment, which held that petitioner had the monopoly of explosion chambers and respondent falsely represented that its safes had such chambers and reversed a decree dismissing petitioner's bill, was reversed because respondent had a right to represent that its safes had an explosion chamber if it were true, and if it were not true, petitioner neither showed loss of sales nor customers would have come to petitioner.



Suggested Study Aids For Tort Law