Legal Opinion

Headley Good Roads Co. v. Barber Asphalt Paving Co.

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided August 7, 1923No. 2957PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DAVIS, Circuit Judge.

The parties will be referred to as they appeared in the District Court. The plaintiff instituted these proceedings to recover royalties alleged to be due it in accordance with a license agreement under letters patent No. 956,009, for a method of making roads l?y the use of a specified bituminous emulsion. The agreement covered another patent, but it was never used and has nothing to do with the decision in this case. The defendant operated under the license and paid the stipulated royalties for all the emulsion sold except that sold to railroads which was used in building…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Kinsman v. ParkhurstSupreme Court of the United States · 1856
  2. Holmes v. McGillCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1901
  3. Angier v. Eaton, Cole & Burnham Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1882
  4. Covell v. BostwickU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1889
  5. Patterson's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1882

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Zenith Laboratories, Inc., on Behalf of Itself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Carter-Wallace, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
  2. Pic Inc. v. Prescon Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1980
  3. Dwight & Lloyd Sintering Co. v. American Ore Reclamation Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1941
  4. Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co. v. MacGregorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  5. Warner Bros. v. American Lady Corset Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1942

2 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