Legal Opinion

California Artificial Stone Paving Co. v. Molitor

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided March 2, 1885No. 1213PublishedCited by 132 opinions

IN ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF' THE UNITED STATES FOR THE !l DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. APPEAL FROM THE SAME COURT. This was a suit to enjoin against the use of a patented invention and for an order to show cause why defendant should not be punished for contempt. The facts which make the case are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Bradley

A bill ivas filed by the appellant in this case against the appellee, complaining that the latter had infringed, and continued to infringe, certain letters patent granted to one John J. Schillinger, and which had been assigned for the State of California to the complainant. The patent was for an improvement in concrete pavement, and was originally issued July 19, 1870, and reissued May 2,1871. The improvement, as' described in the reissued patent, consisted in laying the pavement in detached blocks, separated from each other by ■ strips of tar-paper, or other suitable material, so as to…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Wayman v. SouthardSupreme Court of the United States · 1825
  2. Adams, Cunningham & Co. v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1838
  3. Webster v. CooperSupreme Court of the United States · 1850
  4. White v. TurkSupreme Court of the United States · 1838
  5. Jonathan W. Nesmith v. Thomas C. SheldonSupreme Court of the United States · 1848

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by132 opinions

  1. Taggart v. LorenzenSupreme Court of the United States · 2019
  2. Stephen King v. Allied Vision, Ltd. And Innovation Books, a Division of the Innovation Corporation, New Line Cinema CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
  3. Ksm Fastening Systems, Inc. v. H.A. Jones Company, Inc. And Erico Jones CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
  4. Chao v. Gotham Registry, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2008
  5. Panther Pumps & Equipment Company, Inc., Now Morrison Pump Co., Inc. v. Hydrocraft, Inc., Paul W. Schlosser and Edward DrathCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1977

127 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API