Legal Opinion
Heywood-Wakefield Co. v. Small
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Decided April 14, 1938No. 3312PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBingham, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above),
The principal question raised by the defendant’s motion to vacate the interlocutory injunction and to dismiss the case is whether the plaintiff, Small, and the Coach & Car Equipment ■ Corporation, the intervening plaintiff, can maintain this suit for infringement. The determination of this question depends upon at least two of three subsidiary questions: (1) Whether the Coach & Car Equipment Corporation acquired a valid title to the patent under the so-called license contract of December 15, 1935, so that it would be entitled to damages for the defendant’s…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Waterman v. MacKenzieSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Gayler v. WilderSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
- Crown Die & Tool Co. v. Nye Tool & MacHine WorksSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Littlefield v. PerrySupreme Court of the United States · 1875
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Stein v. United Artists Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- Hook v. Hook & Ackerman, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1951
- Kenyon v. Automatic Instrument Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1947
- Conwed Corporation v. NORTENE, SADistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1975
- John Tuman & Sons, Inc. v. BasseCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1940
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.