State Codes and Statutes

Statutes > Nebraska > Chapter87 > 87-303

87-303. Deceptive tradepractices; damages; injunction; costs; additional remedy.(a) A person likely to be damaged by a deceptive trade practiceof another may bringan action for, and the court may grant, an injunction under the principlesof equity against the person committing the deceptive trade practice. Thecourt may order such additional equitable relief as it deems necessary toprotect the public from further violations, including temporary and permanentinjunctive relief. Proof of monetary damage, loss of profits,or intent to deceive is not required. Relief granted for the copying of anarticle shall be limited to the prevention of confusion or misunderstandingas to source.(b) Costs shall be allowed to the prevailing party unless the courtotherwise directs. The court in its discretion may award attorneys' fees tothe prevailing party if (1) the party complaining of a deceptive trade practicehas brought an action which he knew to be groundless or (2) the party chargedwith a deceptive trade practice has willfully engaged in the trade practiceknowing it to be deceptive.(c) A claimfiled for a violation of the Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act shall beproved by a preponderance of the evidence.(d) The relief provided in this section is inaddition to remedies otherwise available against the same conduct under thecommon law or other statutes of this state.(e) Subdivision (a)(12)of section 87-302 shall not be construed to authorize a civil action againstan interactive computer service, provider of telecommunications service, orcable operator for the actions of an information content provider. SourceLaws 1969, c. 855, § 3, p. 3223; Laws 2010, LB801, § 3.Effective Date: July 15, 2010AnnotationsPortion of order enjoining violator from ever disseminating advertising using competitor's name is deprivation of due process. Kirsch Fabric Corp. v. Brookstein Enterprises, Inc., 209 Neb. 666, 309 N.W.2d 328 (1981).Company found to have committed unfair competition in use of trademark was not liable for attorney's fees in infringement action where activities were not willfully improper with knowledge they were deceptive but acted in colorable theory it had right to use trademark. Wrist-Rocket Manuf. Co., Inc. v. Saunders, 379 F.Supp. 902 (D. Neb. 1974).