Nordstrom, Inc. v. Tampourlos

Supreme Court of Washington · Decided 1987-02-26

Cited by 148 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

Dore, J. We are asked to decide whether a trade name infringement constitutes a Consumer Protection Act violation justifying the award of attorney fees and expenses. We hold that it does, and reverse the Court of Appeals decision denying Nordstrom reasonable attorney fees. Facts The pertinent facts of this case are basically undisputed…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.