Legal Opinion
Peck v. Standard Parts Co.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided July 21, 1922No. 3640PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DENISON, Circuit Judge.
The Hess Pontiac Spring & Axle Company (hereafter called the Pontiac Company, or the employer) was engaged in manufacturing springs for the Ford automobile, and desired automatic machinery for such manufacture. Having already acquaintance and some business relations with Wm. J. Peck, of Peoria, 111., who was a designer of machinery and a solicitor of patents, and a lawyer practicing in patent cases, the Pontiac Company, as first party, entered into a written contract with Peck, as second party, which was signed August, 1915, and the body of which is as follows:
“This…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Solomons v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- McCLURG v. KINGSLANDSupreme Court of the United States · 1843
- Dalzell v. Dueber Watch Case Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Hapgood v. HewittSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Mitchell v. HawleySupreme Court of the United States · 1873
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Magnetic Mfg. Co. v. Dings Magnetic Separator Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1926
- Wiegand v. Dover Mfg. Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1923
- Crown Cork & Seal Co. v. FankhanelDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1943
- St. Louis & O'Fallon Coal Co. v. DinwiddieDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1931
- Tin Decorating Co. of Baltimore v. Metal Package Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1928