Legal Opinion
Cahill v. Regan
New York Supreme Court
Decided April 20, 1956PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the CourtNicholas M. Pette, J.
Plaintiffs seek a declaratory judgment with respect to the ownership of a patent pertaining to an improvement upon the closure of cans.
The pertinent facts are as follows: (a) the defendant was employed in and about September, 1947 to manage the Melvina Can Company on a part-time basis; (b) Melvina Can Company was in the business of manufacturing cans for the storage of fuses for the armed forces; (c) the defendant had been previous to his employment engaged in the business of free-lance buying and selling of second-hand machinery and was instrumental in obtaining United States Government…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- United States v. Dubilier Condenser CorpSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Dalzell v. Dueber Watch Case Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Houghton v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1928
- General Time Corp. v. Padua Alarm Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1952
- Marshall v. Colgate-Palmolive-Peet Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1949
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- B. F. Gladding & Co., Inc. v. Scientific Anglers, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1957