Hein v. Westinghouse Air Brake Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the Northern District of Illnois
At Law. Motion by plaintiff for judgment on pleadings.
1Opinion of the Court
SANBORN, District Judge.
The controversy fully appears in the previous decisions. Westinghouse v. Hein, 159 Fed. 936, 87 C. C. A. 142; Hein v. Westinghouse Air Brake Co. (C. C.) 164 Fed. 79; Hein v. Westinghouse Air Brake Co. (C. C.) 168 Red. 766. In brief, covenant is brought to recover quarterly payments for the sale of patent rights. The chief defense is failure of consideration in that the invention was without utility. Substantially all the technical allegations of the pleas, replications, and rejoinders relate to this defense. The case is complicated, however, by the chancery suit of…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Grimes v. SandersSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Stark v. StarrSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Simon v. Goodyear Metallic Rubber Shoe Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1900
- Kingman & Co. v. StoddardCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1898
- Richardson v. LoweCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1906
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Illinois Fuel Co. v. Mobile & Ohio RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1928
- Liimatainen v. St. Louis River Dam & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1912
- Straight Side Basket Corp. v. Webster Basket Co.District Court, W.D. New York · 1933
- In re Culgin-Pace Contracting Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1915
- Brager v. FriedenwaldCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1916
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.