The opinion of the court was delivered by: KRAFT
These suits are brought by a manufacturer of household and juvenile furniture under its registered trade-mark to enforce by injunction the Pennsylvania Fair Trade Act against five retailers in metropolitan Philadelphia, who have offered for sale and sold plaintiff's fair-traded products at less than the established fair trade prices.
Hearings were held on April 13 and 24, 1959, on plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction. The parties in each case have stipulated that the evidence then received shall comprise the record upon which final judgment may be entered.
Counsel have submitted requests for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and supporting briefs. From the evidence we make the following
1. Plaintiff is an Indiana corporation with its principal office and place of business in Columbus, Indiana. Prior to December 31, 1958 its corporate name was Hamilton Manufacturing Company.
2. Defendant, Nelson's Kiddie City Plymouth Valley, Inc., is a Pennsylvania corporation engaged in the retail merchandise business at 811 Germantown Pike, Plymouth Valley, Pennsylvania.
3. Defendant, Nelson's Kiddie City Roslyn, Inc., is a Pennsylvania corporation engaged in the retail merchandise business at 1180 Easton Road, Roslyn, Pennsylvania.
4. Defendant, Kiddie City Elmwood, Inc., is a Pennsylvania corporation engaged in the retail merchandise business at 7124 Elmwood Avenue, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
5. Defendant, Nelson's Kiddie City Collingdale, Inc., is a Pennsylvania corporation engaged in the retail merchandise business at 1011 MacDade Boulevard, Collingdale, Pennsylvania.
6. Defendant, Kiddie City, Inc., is a Pennsylvania corporation engaged in the retail merchandise business at 7951 Oxford Avenue, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
7. Plaintiff is the manufacturer and vendor of certain household and juvenile furniture which it makes and sells under its own duly registered trade-mark 'Cosco' and which is in fair and open competition in Pennsylvania and elsewhere with commodities of the same general class produced and distributed by others.
8. Plaintiff has expended large sums of money in promoting and advertising its furniture and has established a valuable reputation and goodwill for such furniture and the trade-mark under which it is produced and sold.
9. Plaintiff's advertising program consists of national consumer advertising in magazines, such as The Saturday Evening Post, Good Housekeeping and Better Homes and Gardens and national trade advertising in trade journals such as Home Furnishings Review, Juvenile Merchandising, and Hardware Age. Plaintiff also conducts a dealer cooperative advertising program in local newspapers of ...