Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

Am. Eagle Outfitters v. Lyle & Scott Ltd., No. 08-4807

By FindLaw Staff on September 11, 2009 4:13 PM

In a contract case arising from parties' efforts to resolve a dispute over the use of similar trademarks in their respective clothing lines, a magistrate judge's rulings are affirmed in part where both parties intended an informal document to be a binding contract and no reasonable jury could decide otherwise, and the terms of such document were sufficiently definite to warrant enforcement.  However, the case is remanded as the terms agreed to by the parties with respect to certain clauses were not sufficiently unambiguous to permit judicial interpretation of the contract. 

Read Am. Eagle Outfitters v. Lyle & Scott Ltd., No. 08-4807

Appellate Information

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania (No. 06-cv-00607)
District Judge: Honorable A,y Reynolds Hay

Opinion Filed September 11, 2009


Before:  Fuentes, Jordan, and Nygaard, Circuit Judges 
Opinion by: Fuentes, Circuit Judge 


Counsel for Appellant:  Emily J. Barnhart, Dennis P. McCooe, Timothy D. Pescsenye, Laurence S. Shtasel, James T. Smith, Marc E. Weitzman, Susan B. Flohr, Charles R. Wolfe, Robert L. Byer, Susan G. Schwochau,  

Counsel for Appellee: Clay P. Hughes, Cynthia E. Kernick, Walter T. McGough, Jr., Kirsten R. Rydstrom, Richard T. Ting, Colin E. Wrabley, Theodore R. Remaklus

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard