David v. Harris
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. Suit in equity by Emanuel David and Samuel Weinschenk, copart- ’ ners under the firm name and style of Hy-Do Knitting Company, against Morris Harris. Decree for defendant, and complainants appeal.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. Suit in equity by Emanuel David and Samuel Weinschenk, copart- ’ ners under the firm name and style of Hy-Do Knitting Company, against Morris Harris. Decree for defendant, and complainants appeal. On appeal from a decree of the District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissing the bill which was based on letters patent No. 925,146 granted June 15, 1909, for improvements in sweaters.
1Opinion of the Court
COXE, Circuit Judge.
The principal defense is that the defendant does not infringe the claims when they are limited as required by the prior art.
The patent covers an, ingenious garment which combines two features of the prior art which were previously embodied in separate garments. It can be used as a low-necked sweater in mild, pleasant weather and as a high-necked sweater in cold and stormy weather. Or the wearer, after using the low-necked garment while exercising, can turn up the collar to-avoid catching cold. This result is accomplished by placing upon the collarless low-necked sweater…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Kurtz v. Belle Hat Lining Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1922
- Trane Co. v. Nash Engineering Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1928
- Greenwald Bros. v. La Vogue Petticoat Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1915
- A. Kimball Co. v. Noesting Pin Ticket Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1919
- Samuel M. Langston Co. v. F. X. Hooper Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 1934
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.