Legal Opinion

Matthews v. Spangenberg

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided February 1, 1883PublishedCited by 7 opinions

In Equity.

1Opinion of the CourtWheeleb, J.

This causo has now been heard upon motion of the orator for an attachment against the defendant for- an alleged violation of the injunction heretofore granted, restraining the defendant from infringing letters patent, reissued No. 9,028, granted to tho orator, dated January 6, 1880, for a soda-water apparatus. On tho papers it appears that the defendant has continued the use of an apparatus called the Gee Invincible apparatus, which was at the hearing in chief adjudged to be an infringement, except that he has not used the parts which draw syrup; and that he has paid to the orator tho damages…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. In Re EskayCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1941
  2. United States v. Albert B. SnyderCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1970
  3. United States v. Di MauroCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1971
  4. Queen & Co. v. GreenU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania · 1909
  5. Commercial Investment Co. v. Mayaguez Light & Power Co.District Court, D. Puerto Rico · 1908

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