Fuller v. Schutz
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Hennepin county to recover an undivided one-eighth interest in a patent issued to defendant, and to restrain defendant from disposing thereof, or for an accounting in case said patent had previously been disposed of. At the time of commencing the action plaintiff moved for -a temporary injunction. Defendant answered and at the same time served a notice of motion to dismiss the action for want of jurisdiction.
Read the full summary
Action in the district court for Hennepin county to recover an undivided one-eighth interest in a patent issued to defendant, and to restrain defendant from disposing thereof, or for an accounting in case said patent had previously been disposed of. At the time of commencing the action plaintiff moved for -a temporary injunction. Defendant answered and at the same time served a notice of motion to dismiss the action for want of jurisdiction. The motions were heard together before Harrison, J., who made an order denying the motion to dismiss and granting the motion for a temporary injunction.…
1Opinion of the CourtLovely, J.
Appeal from an order overruling a motion to dismiss the action. The motion was made upon the ground that a controlling question *374involved was solely of federal cognizance, not within the jurisdiction of the state courts. This application was denied, and, included in the denial, a temporary injunction was granted restraining defendant during the pendency of" the action from 'disposing of an interest in a patent process for compounding pulverized coffee with sugar.
An order to dismiss is not appealable under our procedure, but the right to the temporary injunction, if well grounded, necessarily…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Kennedy v. HazeltonSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- State ex rel. Norris v. District Court First Judicial DistrictSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Stees v. KranzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1884
- Hamilton v. WoodSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- O'Brien v. OswaldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
3Cited by7 opinions
- Bilsborrow v. PierceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
- Ekeberg v. MackaySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1911
- Watters v. City of MankatoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
- Holmes v. Park Rapids Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1909
- Town of Burnsville v. City of BloomingtonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1962
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.