Yale University v. Benneson

The plaintiff has appealed from a judgment
of the Superior Court denying it an injunction
to restrain the defendants from using the
name "Yale" in the operation of the Yale Motor Inn
near the Wilbur Cross parkway in the Yalesville
section of the town of Wallingford. The plaintiff
assigns error in one finding of fact, seven of the
twelve conclusions of law, the overruling of its
twenty claims of law, and the rendering of
judgment for the defendants. In its brief, the
plaintiff makes specific reference only to three
of the assignments of error, relating to the
conclusions reached. The others are treated as
abandoned. State v. Ferraiuolo, 145 Conn. 458,
459, 144 A.2d 41. As a result, none of the
subordinate facts are attacked. The conclusions
which the court has reached are to be tested by
the facts as found and must stand unless they are
legally or logically inconsistent with those facts
or unless they involve the application of some
erroneous rule of law material to the case. Monick
v. Greenwich, 144 Conn. 608, 611, 136 A.2d 501. The leading case in this state on unfair competition
in the use of names is Middle town Trust Co. v.
Middletown National Bank, 110 Conn. 13,
147 A. 22. In it (p. 20), we held that whether or not the
defendants' conduct constituted unfair competition was
a question of fact for the trier. We said: "No inflexible
rule can be laid down as to what use of names will
constitute unfair competition; this is a question of
fact. The question to be determined is whether or
not, as a matter of fact, the name is such as to
cause confusion in the public mind as between the
plaintiff's business and that of the defendant,
[147 Conn. 256]