American Airlines, Inc. v. North American Airlines, Inc.
351 U.S. 79 (1956)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

American Airlines, Inc. v. North American Airlines, Inc., 351 U.S. 79 (1956)

American Airlines, Inc. v. North American Airlines, Inc.

No. 410

Argued March 6-7, 1956

Decided April 23, 1956

351 U.S. 79

Syllabus

In a proceeding under § 411 of the Civil Aeronautics Act, the Civil Aeronautics Board found that respondent's use of the name "North American" in the air transportation industry, in which it competed with American Airlines, had caused "substantial public confusion" by causing persons to check in at the wrong carrier, attempt to purchase transportation from the wrong carrier, meet flights of the wrong carrier, and otherwise, that such public confusion was "likely to continue" and was an unfair method of competition within the meaning of § 411. It further found that the public interest required elimination of the use of the name, and it ordered respondent to cease and desist from engaging in air transportation under the name of "North American Airlines" or any combination of the word "American."

Held:

1. The Board applied criteria appropriate to a determination of whether a proceeding by it in this case would be in the "interest of the public," as required by § 411, and it had jurisdiction to inquire into the methods of competition presented here and to determine whether they constituted a violation of the Act. Pp. 351 U. S. 80-85.

2. The Board's evidentiary findings concerned confusion of the type which can support a finding of violation of § 411. Pp. 351 U. S. 85-86.

3. However, since this Court does not understand the Court of Appeals to have decided whether the Board's findings were supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole, the case is remanded to that Court for further proceedings in the light of this opinion. P. 351 U. S. 86.

9 U.S.App.D.C. 85, 228 F.2d 432, reversed and remanded.

Page 351 U. S. 80

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.