Lucky Brand Dungarees Inc., et al. v. Ally Apparel Resources LLC, USDC SDNY. Case No. 1:2005cv067 (May 5, 2010). not cited on Westlaw.
Lucky Brand sued Marcel Fashion Group Inc., owners of the “GET LUCKY” apparel line and its licensee Ally Apparel for trademark infringement in 2005. However, the trademark “GET LUCKY” was registered and used by Marcel Fashions long before Lucky Brand came into existence. Also, Lucky Brand, represented by Greenberg Traurig, was sanctioned for discovery violations.
Marcel Fashions counterclaimed and won a partial summary judgment on some trademark issues and breach of a settlement agreement from 2003. Marcel Fashions also won a $580,000 jury verdict for federal trademark infringement at trial against New York-based Liz Claiborne Inc. Marcel Fashions was represented by McCool Smith.
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Two Slashers and an Advertising Company: In Likelihood of Confusion, Actual Confusion of Plaintiff’s Customers and Type of Mark are the Most Important Factors
Caliber Automotive Liquidators, Inc. v. Premier Chrysler, Jeep, Dodge, LLC, 605 F.3d 931, 94 U.S.P.Q.2d 1866, 22 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C 763 (11th Cir.(Ga.), May 07, 2010) (NO. 08-16179)
Caliber Automotive Liquidators, Inc. service mark owner of “Slash-It! Sales Event” provides advertising and promotions to car dealerships. Premier Automotive Group is a car dealership that makes its own promotional infomercial called the “Slasher Show”. Caliber sued Premier for trademark infringement based on it use of “Slasher” words in its promotion of car super sales. Caliber appealed a judgment for Premier in the North District of Georgia. The Appeals Court held that genuine issues of material fact existed as to strength of owner's “slasher” service marks, the actual confusion amongst the relevant consumer class, and likelihood of confusion. The Appeals court found that the actual confusion of actual customers of Caliber weighed very heavily in favor of finding an overall likelihood of confusion. Although the district court found that the Slash-It! Sales Event mark was descriptive, the district court erred in not recognizing that the marks also achieved federal incontestable status, and thus were entitled to strong protection. Moreover, Premier does not point to evidence to counter the evidence of confusion. The Appeals court stated, “the test [is] not whether the goods could be distinguished ... but whether the goods are so related in the minds of consumers that they get the sense that a single producer is likely to put out both goods Caliber has presented sufficient evidence of the strength of its marks and of actual confusion amongst the. The Appeals court reversed and remanded on the Federal issues.
Caliber Automotive Liquidators, Inc. service mark owner of “Slash-It! Sales Event” provides advertising and promotions to car dealerships. Premier Automotive Group is a car dealership that makes its own promotional infomercial called the “Slasher Show”. Caliber sued Premier for trademark infringement based on it use of “Slasher” words in its promotion of car super sales. Caliber appealed a judgment for Premier in the North District of Georgia. The Appeals Court held that genuine issues of material fact existed as to strength of owner's “slasher” service marks, the actual confusion amongst the relevant consumer class, and likelihood of confusion. The Appeals court found that the actual confusion of actual customers of Caliber weighed very heavily in favor of finding an overall likelihood of confusion. Although the district court found that the Slash-It! Sales Event mark was descriptive, the district court erred in not recognizing that the marks also achieved federal incontestable status, and thus were entitled to strong protection. Moreover, Premier does not point to evidence to counter the evidence of confusion. The Appeals court stated, “the test [is] not whether the goods could be distinguished ... but whether the goods are so related in the minds of consumers that they get the sense that a single producer is likely to put out both goods Caliber has presented sufficient evidence of the strength of its marks and of actual confusion amongst the. The Appeals court reversed and remanded on the Federal issues.
Infringement: No Secondary Meaning Outside of Los Angeles, Unregistered Mark, Geographic Breadth Between Two Marks, Different Theme and Style of Restaurants, & No Bad Faith Intent.
Dan Tana v. Dantanna’s., 2010 U.S. App. Lexis 14514 (11th Cir.), (C.A. 11, Jul. 15, 2010) Case No. 09-15123
Los Angeles restaurant Dan Tana sued Atlanta restaurant Dantanna’s for trademark infringement. The district court ruled in favor of Dantanna’s and the Appeal court affirmed. The Appeals court found there was material fact at issue on likelihood of confusion. Although the two businesses were similar, as they were both upscale restaurants, Dan Tana in did not register for a federal trademark and could not prove secondary meaning outside of Los Angeles. The court also considered that the two restaurants were on opposite sides of the country and were different themed restaurants. Dan Tana was a cozy Italian restaurant, whereas Dantanna’s was sports themed, with a surf and turf menu. In also, there was no bad faith intent to infringe or profit off of the confusion because Dantanna’s was named for the owner’s two children Dan and Anna.
Los Angeles restaurant Dan Tana sued Atlanta restaurant Dantanna’s for trademark infringement. The district court ruled in favor of Dantanna’s and the Appeal court affirmed. The Appeals court found there was material fact at issue on likelihood of confusion. Although the two businesses were similar, as they were both upscale restaurants, Dan Tana in did not register for a federal trademark and could not prove secondary meaning outside of Los Angeles. The court also considered that the two restaurants were on opposite sides of the country and were different themed restaurants. Dan Tana was a cozy Italian restaurant, whereas Dantanna’s was sports themed, with a surf and turf menu. In also, there was no bad faith intent to infringe or profit off of the confusion because Dantanna’s was named for the owner’s two children Dan and Anna.
International Marks: Priority and Sufficient Use in the United States for Protection in the United States
Hamdard Trust v. Ajit Newspaper Advertising, Marketing and Communications, Inc., 2010 WL 3749085 (2nd Cir.(N.Y.), (Sep 28, 2010) (NO. 09-4965-CV)
The Appeals court, applying de novo review, affirmed the District court’s order granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust failed to prove that it “possessed a priority right to the use” of the mark in question because “meager trickle of business” in the United States was insufficient to “constitute[ ] the kind of bona fide use intended to afford a basis for trademark protection.” More specifically, Plaintiff failed to establish “deliberate” use of the mark in the United States; rather, its “sporadic” and “casual” use was insufficient to defeat the grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants as a matter of law. Id. As the district court observed, a trademark is “recognized as having a separate existence in each sovereign territory in which it is registered or legally recognized as a mark.” Therefore, as the court found here, “foreign use is ineffectual to create trademark rights in the United States.”
The Appeals court, applying de novo review, affirmed the District court’s order granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust failed to prove that it “possessed a priority right to the use” of the mark in question because “meager trickle of business” in the United States was insufficient to “constitute[ ] the kind of bona fide use intended to afford a basis for trademark protection.” More specifically, Plaintiff failed to establish “deliberate” use of the mark in the United States; rather, its “sporadic” and “casual” use was insufficient to defeat the grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants as a matter of law. Id. As the district court observed, a trademark is “recognized as having a separate existence in each sovereign territory in which it is registered or legally recognized as a mark.” Therefore, as the court found here, “foreign use is ineffectual to create trademark rights in the United States.”
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Fendi, Famous Brand Counterfeit, Willfulness, Acquiescence, Laches & Unclean Hands
Fendi Adele S.R.L. v. Ashley Reed Trading, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13934 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 16, 2010)
The Plaintiff, the famous Italian fashion design company Fendi sued Defendant, Ashley Reed trading company for selling counterfeit leather handbags. Plaintiff successfully alleged that Defendant sold counterfeit handbags, of a lower quality than the real Fendi brand, willfully and with bad faith. Nordstrom Rack and Off Fifth were among the stores that unwittingly bought the counterfeit Fendi handbags from Ashley Reed. The bags were spotted as counterfeit by the lower quality of leather and the missing hologram Fendi security logos. Defendant failed to meet its burden of proof for acquiescence, laches and unclean hands, in light of repeated cease and desist demands from Plaintiff. Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment was granted as to their request to strike Defendants' affirmative defenses and as to their claims of trademark counterfeiting and false designation of origin under the Lanham Act, common law unfair competition under New York law, and trademark dilution under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c) and Section 360-l of the New York General Business Law. The Defendants were permanently enjoined under section 43(a) of the Lanham Act from purchasing, offering for sale, or selling any item bearing the word "Fendi" and/or any of Fendi's registered trademarks without the express written permission of Plaintiffs; and it was further ordered that the matter be referred to a Magistrate Judge for a determination as to the appropriateness of an accounting of Defendants' profits and, if warranted, an assessment of Plaintiffs' damages.
The Plaintiff, the famous Italian fashion design company Fendi sued Defendant, Ashley Reed trading company for selling counterfeit leather handbags. Plaintiff successfully alleged that Defendant sold counterfeit handbags, of a lower quality than the real Fendi brand, willfully and with bad faith. Nordstrom Rack and Off Fifth were among the stores that unwittingly bought the counterfeit Fendi handbags from Ashley Reed. The bags were spotted as counterfeit by the lower quality of leather and the missing hologram Fendi security logos. Defendant failed to meet its burden of proof for acquiescence, laches and unclean hands, in light of repeated cease and desist demands from Plaintiff. Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment was granted as to their request to strike Defendants' affirmative defenses and as to their claims of trademark counterfeiting and false designation of origin under the Lanham Act, common law unfair competition under New York law, and trademark dilution under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c) and Section 360-l of the New York General Business Law. The Defendants were permanently enjoined under section 43(a) of the Lanham Act from purchasing, offering for sale, or selling any item bearing the word "Fendi" and/or any of Fendi's registered trademarks without the express written permission of Plaintiffs; and it was further ordered that the matter be referred to a Magistrate Judge for a determination as to the appropriateness of an accounting of Defendants' profits and, if warranted, an assessment of Plaintiffs' damages.
University of Miami Plagiarism Case, Revisiting the Dastar case precedent: The Lanham Act Does Not Create a Cause of Action for Plagiarism.
Andela v. Univ. of Miami, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20432, 45-47 (S.D. Fla. Mar. 8, 2010)
Plaintiff Valentine B. Andela sued his former employer University of Miami and also University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill based on actions arising out of alleged plagiarism of post-doctoral research manuscripts. Andela brought these actions pro se. Andela is a physician-scientist from Cameroon, Africa, whose area of study is translational cancer research and international technology transfer to Africa. Andela was employed by UM from June of 2005 to September 25, 2006, as a post-doctoral associate in the Viral Oncology program at UM's Sylvester Comprehensive Care Center (the "Sylvester Center"). Throughout his employment as a post-doctoral associate, Andela worked in the laboratory of Dr. William J. Harrington, Jr. Plaintiff Angela alleges that Harrington "passed off" the Revised Manuscript by submitting a "mutilated version of Dr. Andela's work to the journal Blood, listing Dr. Andela as the primary author without Dr. Andela's required approval, consent, and signature . . . ." Andela then alleged that UM and UNC "reverse passed off" the Revised Manuscript to Cancer Research by plagiarizing and submitting his work without his name attributed to the article and without regard to his request that they refrain from doing so. The According to the controlling decision in the Dastar case, Section 43 of the Lanham Act, does not apply to communicative products such as the Revised Manuscript. Accordingly, Andela's allegations failed to state a claim and were dismissed with prejudice.
Plaintiff Valentine B. Andela sued his former employer University of Miami and also University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill based on actions arising out of alleged plagiarism of post-doctoral research manuscripts. Andela brought these actions pro se. Andela is a physician-scientist from Cameroon, Africa, whose area of study is translational cancer research and international technology transfer to Africa. Andela was employed by UM from June of 2005 to September 25, 2006, as a post-doctoral associate in the Viral Oncology program at UM's Sylvester Comprehensive Care Center (the "Sylvester Center"). Throughout his employment as a post-doctoral associate, Andela worked in the laboratory of Dr. William J. Harrington, Jr. Plaintiff Angela alleges that Harrington "passed off" the Revised Manuscript by submitting a "mutilated version of Dr. Andela's work to the journal Blood, listing Dr. Andela as the primary author without Dr. Andela's required approval, consent, and signature . . . ." Andela then alleged that UM and UNC "reverse passed off" the Revised Manuscript to Cancer Research by plagiarizing and submitting his work without his name attributed to the article and without regard to his request that they refrain from doing so. The According to the controlling decision in the Dastar case, Section 43 of the Lanham Act, does not apply to communicative products such as the Revised Manuscript. Accordingly, Andela's allegations failed to state a claim and were dismissed with prejudice.
Counterfeit Cartoon Costumes, and required notice for seizure and destruction under Article 15, section 1116(d)(1)(A)
Lyons P'ship, L.P. v. D&L Amusement & Entm't, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28571 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 2, 2010)
The company that owned intellectual property rights to the comic characters Barney, Baby Bop, Bob the Builder and Clifford the Big Red Dog brought an action for federal trademark, false designation of origin, copyright, and related state claims against Defendants for producing and selling infringing costumes portraying these characters. The Plainitff was not awarded remedies under Article 15, sections 1116(d)(1)(A) and 1118 for seizure and destruction of the infringing goods because the requisite ten day notice under section 1116(d)(1)(A) was not sent to Defendants. However, the Plaintiff was awarded statutory damages, attorneys fees and costs from each of the Defendants. Also, a permanent injunction was granted in favor of Plaintiff to prevent each Defendant from using the infringing trademarks and copyrights in commerce.
The company that owned intellectual property rights to the comic characters Barney, Baby Bop, Bob the Builder and Clifford the Big Red Dog brought an action for federal trademark, false designation of origin, copyright, and related state claims against Defendants for producing and selling infringing costumes portraying these characters. The Plainitff was not awarded remedies under Article 15, sections 1116(d)(1)(A) and 1118 for seizure and destruction of the infringing goods because the requisite ten day notice under section 1116(d)(1)(A) was not sent to Defendants. However, the Plaintiff was awarded statutory damages, attorneys fees and costs from each of the Defendants. Also, a permanent injunction was granted in favor of Plaintiff to prevent each Defendant from using the infringing trademarks and copyrights in commerce.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
New Florida Film Incentives Bill Passes in the FL Senate
SB 1752 passed through the FL Senate on March 25!
CS/HB 697 passed unanimously through the House Finance & Tax Council the afternoon of March 25!!
Many thanks to our House & Senate Sponsors, co-Sponsors and all the Legislators who have voted to support these pieces of legislation - we greatly appreciate their continued support!
From FAME Government Affairs Specialist (Dave Caserta) regarding SB 1752...
"I am happy to announce SB 1752, the Jobs Bill, which includes our tax credit was read for the second time on the Senate floor, discussed and was then rolled over to third reading for a final vote of the full senate. The full senate passed the Jobs bill 38 to 2 and has now sent the bill over to the House."
From FAME Government Affairs Specialist (Dave Caserta) regarding CS/HB 697...
"Our bill HB 697 was heard today in Finance and tax. Presentations were made by Rep Precourt, Rep Ambler and Rep Caroll praising the industry and its impact on Florida residents and businesses. The bill reduces the cap for on the amount that a production can get in the general cue to 8mill. Also reduces the incentive to 55mil first year, 50 mill second and 27mill each for third, fourth and fifth year.
The members voted unanimously to support our great bill. We now go to the floor of the house.
What a GREAT team we have...keep up the amazing work guys!! We are making a difference!!"
For more information, see:
http://www.easl.info/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=44
Thanks to the EASL Membership, EASL EC, and special thanks to EASL Legislative Committee members Stephen Carlisle (EASL Chair-Elect), Nina-Dawne Williams (EASL Chair), Charlotte Towne, Nick Nanton, Tom Player, and Chrissie Scelsi.
Thanks again for your continued support!
All the best,
Emily Graham
Legislative Chair
Entertainment, Arts and Sports Law Section of the Florida Bar
CS/HB 697 passed unanimously through the House Finance & Tax Council the afternoon of March 25!!
Many thanks to our House & Senate Sponsors, co-Sponsors and all the Legislators who have voted to support these pieces of legislation - we greatly appreciate their continued support!
From FAME Government Affairs Specialist (Dave Caserta) regarding SB 1752...
"I am happy to announce SB 1752, the Jobs Bill, which includes our tax credit was read for the second time on the Senate floor, discussed and was then rolled over to third reading for a final vote of the full senate. The full senate passed the Jobs bill 38 to 2 and has now sent the bill over to the House."
From FAME Government Affairs Specialist (Dave Caserta) regarding CS/HB 697...
"Our bill HB 697 was heard today in Finance and tax. Presentations were made by Rep Precourt, Rep Ambler and Rep Caroll praising the industry and its impact on Florida residents and businesses. The bill reduces the cap for on the amount that a production can get in the general cue to 8mill. Also reduces the incentive to 55mil first year, 50 mill second and 27mill each for third, fourth and fifth year.
The members voted unanimously to support our great bill. We now go to the floor of the house.
What a GREAT team we have...keep up the amazing work guys!! We are making a difference!!"
For more information, see:
http://www.easl.info/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=44
Thanks to the EASL Membership, EASL EC, and special thanks to EASL Legislative Committee members Stephen Carlisle (EASL Chair-Elect), Nina-Dawne Williams (EASL Chair), Charlotte Towne, Nick Nanton, Tom Player, and Chrissie Scelsi.
Thanks again for your continued support!
All the best,
Emily Graham
Legislative Chair
Entertainment, Arts and Sports Law Section of the Florida Bar
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Depictions of University Football Uniforms: Trade Dress, Licensing and the First Amendment
Univ. of Ala. Bd. of Trs. v. New Life Art Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120238 (N.D. Ala. Nov. 2, 2009)
The issue was whether defendants infringed on plaintiff's trade dress by creating and selling paintings and prints which included pictures of University of Alabama football uniforms on players?
The defendant Daniel Moore is a highly qualified and well known sports artist who has painted a number of artistic presentations of notable University of Alabama football plays. The other defendant, New Life Art Inc., is the company that employs Daniel Moore as an artist. The dispute refers to a gap in time where there was no licensing agreement in effect between the parties. The defendants took the position that Moore's paintings (referred to as "images") and prints, as distinguished from "Indicia," did not have to be licensed. The plaintiff took the position that the uniforms worn by its football players in its colors were trade dress on which it had a protectable trademark and that the defendants cannot portray and sell football scenes which include those uniforms without a license to do so.
Among the court’s conclusions were: (1) The colors of the uniforms in Moore's paintings may be a weak trade dress mark, since they have created local secondary meaning but the colors are common for university uniforms. (2) The paintings may create a likelihood of confusion with regard to plaintiff's said mark. The court also found that, notwithstanding the foregoing conclusions, (1) there is no genuine issue of material fact with regard to defendants' defenses premised on Artistic Expression, First Amendment and Fair Use, and that defendants are entitled to prevail with regard to the paintings and prints of fine art quality as discussed. This conclusion includes a determination that even if there is a likelihood of confusion, the balancing of such likelihood and the public interest entitles defendants to prevail. (2) That the defendants have not and will not infringe on any trademark or trade dress mark of the plaintiff by creating, manufacturing, producing, selling, distributing or otherwise dealing in paintings and/or prints which are of the same or larger size and equal or greater quality than the limited edition paintings and prints that the defendants have heretofore created and produced.
The issue was whether defendants infringed on plaintiff's trade dress by creating and selling paintings and prints which included pictures of University of Alabama football uniforms on players?
The defendant Daniel Moore is a highly qualified and well known sports artist who has painted a number of artistic presentations of notable University of Alabama football plays. The other defendant, New Life Art Inc., is the company that employs Daniel Moore as an artist. The dispute refers to a gap in time where there was no licensing agreement in effect between the parties. The defendants took the position that Moore's paintings (referred to as "images") and prints, as distinguished from "Indicia," did not have to be licensed. The plaintiff took the position that the uniforms worn by its football players in its colors were trade dress on which it had a protectable trademark and that the defendants cannot portray and sell football scenes which include those uniforms without a license to do so.
Among the court’s conclusions were: (1) The colors of the uniforms in Moore's paintings may be a weak trade dress mark, since they have created local secondary meaning but the colors are common for university uniforms. (2) The paintings may create a likelihood of confusion with regard to plaintiff's said mark. The court also found that, notwithstanding the foregoing conclusions, (1) there is no genuine issue of material fact with regard to defendants' defenses premised on Artistic Expression, First Amendment and Fair Use, and that defendants are entitled to prevail with regard to the paintings and prints of fine art quality as discussed. This conclusion includes a determination that even if there is a likelihood of confusion, the balancing of such likelihood and the public interest entitles defendants to prevail. (2) That the defendants have not and will not infringe on any trademark or trade dress mark of the plaintiff by creating, manufacturing, producing, selling, distributing or otherwise dealing in paintings and/or prints which are of the same or larger size and equal or greater quality than the limited edition paintings and prints that the defendants have heretofore created and produced.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Bienvenu à Montréal
Montreal is the second largest French speaking city in the world, only after Paris. So, it is not surprising that Montreal is also widely considered, “La Capital Gastronomique de l'America del Nòrd”, a worthy rival to New York City for best restaurants in North America. This is all about the food, mon cherie!
Best French Canadian BBQ: St-Hubert, aka St. Hubert’s, where the barbeque chicken is cooked to perfection. The chicken melts in your mouth and the flavor is out of this world. For accompaniments, there are fries and the signature barbeque sauce. “Le sauce BBQ” is not a sweet southern barbeque sauce. It is boldly flavored yet delicately spiced gravy. Also, try the brochette. This is chicken barbeque on a skewer with pineapple, cherry, green bell pepper, and onion, candied over fire with their light sweet sauce. For dessert, you cannot miss the sugar pie, aka tart aux sucre. It is like a pecan pie without the pecans, and creamier with a more delicate pie crust. Mmm mm mm!
World Legend for “La Viande Fumée”: Schwartz’s Charcuterie Hebraique de Montreal, aka Schwartz’s Montreal Hebrew Delicatessen, aka Chez Schwartz, is truly unique. There are over 80 years of this Montreal tradition, which is open ‘til the wee hours of the morning. The brisket is marinated for ten days in secret mix of delicious herbs and seasonings. No preservatives are used. The meat is smoked daily on the premises. You will not find this kind of smoked beef anywhere else in the world. It is not corned beef and not pastrami. It is sliced thick and meaty. Have a sandwich on rye or just a pound on your plate, and don’t forget the side order of their fresh fries. Another great Montreal special: the karnatzel. It is homemade sausage/salami about a foot and a half long and just less than an inch in diameter, with a uniquely spiced and all-natural smoked flavor.
Best French Patisserie: La Patisserie Duc de Lorraine is located by Mount Royal at the intersection of Côte-des-Neiges and Rue St. Mary, and is quite frankly the best French patisserie in the world. I have based this statement on the opinions of my own and a multitude of world travelers, even comparing the delights here to those of the best patisseries in Paris, France. If you have time, sit down in the tea room and admire the beautiful neighborhood. My sister ordered the croque-monsieur, which is French bread with ham and cheese melted on top. The baguette is simply superb, and the ham and cheese were of the best quality. I ordered my all time favorite, le croissant aux jambon et fromage (ham and cheese). The croissants here have a great flavor and delicate texture. Also, you must try the desserts! The gigantic chocolate rum balls have the perfect chocolate and sugar taste with a surprise of orange zest. All the classics are done best here: the napoleons, chocolate cakes and strawberry tarts. The Patate Grand-Marnier really takes the cake. It is an almond flavored miniature cake soaked in Grand-Marnier and topped with cocoa covered marzipan icing. C'est yummy!
Winner of The Bagel Wars: Fairmont Bagel Bakery and St-Viateur Bakery & Café. I am biased. To any Montrealer, the only crave-worthy bagel is a Montreal bagel and the New York bagels are just second best. Montreal bagels are a totally different animal to the chewy water New York bagels. The Montreal bagels contain malt, egg, no salt. They are boiled in honey water and then baked in a wood brick oven. The flames from the oven give the bagels a lighter and darker colored and somewhat crunchy outside. The inside of the bagel is a little bit cake like. The light sweetness of a Montreal bagel contrasts perfectly with a light saltiness of good piece of Nova Scotia salmon and fromage à la crème. Go to Fairmont Bagels, where they have been firing up baking bagels since 1949. They also have really cute and crunchy mini bagels. Also you must try the equally legendary St-Viateur Bagel, where you can get a freshly baked bagel 24 hours a day.
World’s Best Indian Restaurant: Le Maison Cari Golden, aka the Curry House, aka Ben’s. If you are lucky, the owner Ben will be there. He is also a genius stock trader and enjoys an easy and intelligent conversation about the financial markets. The curries, kormas, and spices here unfold like a delicate perfumed garden. Try the samosas for an appetizer. They are spicy vegetable pockets in flaky pastry that come with a crème mint dipping sauce. My all time favorite, the chicken korma was just superb. The creamy spiced yoghurt sauce had sweet fruit and elegant heat. The chicken tikka, my sister’s all time favorite, was as flavorful as it was red. This chicken gets its color from cooking in a red clay pot. For dessert, get the gulab jamon. These are cake balls soaked in sweet rosewater. Words cannot describe how wonderful these flavors are!
The Poutine Phenomenon: Poutine is french fries covered in fresh cheddar cheese curd (le fromage beaucronne), topped with a special pepper sauce (le sauce poutine). In New York, there are 24 hour delis. In Montreal, there are 24 poutine “restos”.
The best is Resto la Banquis 24th. This is a funky little place with the classic poutine, and 24 other variations such as the “T-Rex” and the “Kamikase”. The cheese curds here squeak like they are supposed to. If they don’t squeak, the cheese isn’t fresh. Another great place for 24 hour poutine is Le Club-Sandwich, in the Gay village. This is three stories of 50s flair. At Patati Patata (the name is a play on the Quebecois word for French fries, patat frits), you can get poutine with tasty red wine gravy. If you are in the mood for Le Haute Poutine, try the fois gras poutine at Pied de Cochon.
As the restaurateur Fernand LaChance, who legend has it created the first poutine said, "ça va faire une maudite poutine!" That’s going to make a damn mess!
P.S. What are your favorite restaurants in Montreal?
Best French Canadian BBQ: St-Hubert, aka St. Hubert’s, where the barbeque chicken is cooked to perfection. The chicken melts in your mouth and the flavor is out of this world. For accompaniments, there are fries and the signature barbeque sauce. “Le sauce BBQ” is not a sweet southern barbeque sauce. It is boldly flavored yet delicately spiced gravy. Also, try the brochette. This is chicken barbeque on a skewer with pineapple, cherry, green bell pepper, and onion, candied over fire with their light sweet sauce. For dessert, you cannot miss the sugar pie, aka tart aux sucre. It is like a pecan pie without the pecans, and creamier with a more delicate pie crust. Mmm mm mm!
World Legend for “La Viande Fumée”: Schwartz’s Charcuterie Hebraique de Montreal, aka Schwartz’s Montreal Hebrew Delicatessen, aka Chez Schwartz, is truly unique. There are over 80 years of this Montreal tradition, which is open ‘til the wee hours of the morning. The brisket is marinated for ten days in secret mix of delicious herbs and seasonings. No preservatives are used. The meat is smoked daily on the premises. You will not find this kind of smoked beef anywhere else in the world. It is not corned beef and not pastrami. It is sliced thick and meaty. Have a sandwich on rye or just a pound on your plate, and don’t forget the side order of their fresh fries. Another great Montreal special: the karnatzel. It is homemade sausage/salami about a foot and a half long and just less than an inch in diameter, with a uniquely spiced and all-natural smoked flavor.
Best French Patisserie: La Patisserie Duc de Lorraine is located by Mount Royal at the intersection of Côte-des-Neiges and Rue St. Mary, and is quite frankly the best French patisserie in the world. I have based this statement on the opinions of my own and a multitude of world travelers, even comparing the delights here to those of the best patisseries in Paris, France. If you have time, sit down in the tea room and admire the beautiful neighborhood. My sister ordered the croque-monsieur, which is French bread with ham and cheese melted on top. The baguette is simply superb, and the ham and cheese were of the best quality. I ordered my all time favorite, le croissant aux jambon et fromage (ham and cheese). The croissants here have a great flavor and delicate texture. Also, you must try the desserts! The gigantic chocolate rum balls have the perfect chocolate and sugar taste with a surprise of orange zest. All the classics are done best here: the napoleons, chocolate cakes and strawberry tarts. The Patate Grand-Marnier really takes the cake. It is an almond flavored miniature cake soaked in Grand-Marnier and topped with cocoa covered marzipan icing. C'est yummy!
Winner of The Bagel Wars: Fairmont Bagel Bakery and St-Viateur Bakery & Café. I am biased. To any Montrealer, the only crave-worthy bagel is a Montreal bagel and the New York bagels are just second best. Montreal bagels are a totally different animal to the chewy water New York bagels. The Montreal bagels contain malt, egg, no salt. They are boiled in honey water and then baked in a wood brick oven. The flames from the oven give the bagels a lighter and darker colored and somewhat crunchy outside. The inside of the bagel is a little bit cake like. The light sweetness of a Montreal bagel contrasts perfectly with a light saltiness of good piece of Nova Scotia salmon and fromage à la crème. Go to Fairmont Bagels, where they have been firing up baking bagels since 1949. They also have really cute and crunchy mini bagels. Also you must try the equally legendary St-Viateur Bagel, where you can get a freshly baked bagel 24 hours a day.
World’s Best Indian Restaurant: Le Maison Cari Golden, aka the Curry House, aka Ben’s. If you are lucky, the owner Ben will be there. He is also a genius stock trader and enjoys an easy and intelligent conversation about the financial markets. The curries, kormas, and spices here unfold like a delicate perfumed garden. Try the samosas for an appetizer. They are spicy vegetable pockets in flaky pastry that come with a crème mint dipping sauce. My all time favorite, the chicken korma was just superb. The creamy spiced yoghurt sauce had sweet fruit and elegant heat. The chicken tikka, my sister’s all time favorite, was as flavorful as it was red. This chicken gets its color from cooking in a red clay pot. For dessert, get the gulab jamon. These are cake balls soaked in sweet rosewater. Words cannot describe how wonderful these flavors are!
The Poutine Phenomenon: Poutine is french fries covered in fresh cheddar cheese curd (le fromage beaucronne), topped with a special pepper sauce (le sauce poutine). In New York, there are 24 hour delis. In Montreal, there are 24 poutine “restos”.
The best is Resto la Banquis 24th. This is a funky little place with the classic poutine, and 24 other variations such as the “T-Rex” and the “Kamikase”. The cheese curds here squeak like they are supposed to. If they don’t squeak, the cheese isn’t fresh. Another great place for 24 hour poutine is Le Club-Sandwich, in the Gay village. This is three stories of 50s flair. At Patati Patata (the name is a play on the Quebecois word for French fries, patat frits), you can get poutine with tasty red wine gravy. If you are in the mood for Le Haute Poutine, try the fois gras poutine at Pied de Cochon.
As the restaurateur Fernand LaChance, who legend has it created the first poutine said, "ça va faire une maudite poutine!" That’s going to make a damn mess!
P.S. What are your favorite restaurants in Montreal?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
