Legal Opinion
Eno v. Prime Manufacturing Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided October 29, 1943PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRonan, J.
The plaintiff, the administratrix of the estate *688of Frank F. Eno, who, it is alleged, invented a certain process in the manufacture of shoes, seeks to recover compensation from the defendant for the use of the process under a license granted by him to the defendant on May 26, 1933, and terminating on May 16,1940, and damages from the last mentioned date to July 1, 1941, for breach of the license agreement by the failure of the defendant to cease using the process upon the termination of its license. The suit was heard upon the issue of liability, by a judge who made a report of the material…
2Cases cited96 opinions
- Waterman v. MacKenzieSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Seymour v. OsborneSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- Cuno Engineering Corp. v. Automatic Devices Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
- General Electric Co. v. Wabash Appliance Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Gayler v. WilderSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
91 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Jet Spray Cooler, Inc. v. CramptonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1979
- Hastings Associates, Inc. v. Local 369 Building Fund, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1997
- Cygan v. MegathlinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1951
- USM Corp. v. Marson Fastener Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1984
- City of Newton v. Department of Public UtilitiesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1959
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.