Brookfield v. Novelty Glass Meg. Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey
In Equity. Suit for infringement of a patent. On rule to show cause why attachment for contempt should not issue.
1Opinion of the Court
LANNING, District Judge.
This hearing comes before the court on the return of a rule to show cause why the defendant the Novelty Glass Manufacturing Company and its officers, Daniel M. Parker, Clement W. Shoemaker, Jonathan W. Parker, R. Elmer Shoemaker, and Thomas C. Duffield, should not be punished for contempt of court. The contempt alleged is the violation of an injunction issued in this cause on October 29, 1903, restraining the Novelty Glass Manufacturing Company, its successors and assigns, and each of its officers, servants, agents, attorneys, employés, and workmen, from any…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- California Artificial Stone Paving Co. v. MolitorSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Brookfield v. Elmer GlassworksU.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey · 1904
- Brookfield v. Novelty Glass Mfg. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey · 1903