Legal Opinion

Blaisdell Filtration Co. v. Bayard & Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 6, 1933No. Appeal, 337PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Drew,

This action of replevin was brought by plaintiff, Blaisdell Filtration Company, to obtain possession of a filtering machine and certain tools, patterns, office equipment and other personal property held by defendant, M. L. Bayard & Company. The jury found in favor of plaintiff, and from the judgment entered on the verdict defendant appealed.

Plaintiff is the owner of certain patents on machines for the filtering of water for water supply purposes. Defendant acted as the manufacturer of such machines under plaintiff’s patents. M. L. Bayard was president of both…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Washington N. Gas Co. v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
  2. Miller's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  3. Troop v. Franklin Savings & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  4. Erny v. SauerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
  5. Lewis v. Hamilton's Exrs.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Chatham Communications, Inc. v. General Press Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  2. Lucacher v. KersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
  3. Law v. MacKieSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
  4. Peoples Mortgage Co. v. Federal National Mortgage Ass'nDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1994
  5. Lebeck v. William A. Jarvis, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1956

10 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