Davis v. Bell
Superior Court of New Hampshire
This was an action of assumpsit upon the following contract. “For value received, we promise N. T. Davis, to pay him one ‘ hundred and fifty dollars by Sept. 1, 1833, with interest after April, ‘ 1833, at our store in Haverhill, on condition that said Davis’ ‘ conveyance to us of Shove & Hunt’s patent right shall approve ‘ itself as good in all respects as said Davis’ covenants, in his deed ' of conveyance of this date, have represented it. ‘ December 27, 1832.” ‘ J. & J.…
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit upon the following contract. “For value received, we promise N. T. Davis, to pay him one ‘ hundred and fifty dollars by Sept. 1, 1833, with interest after April, ‘ 1833, at our store in Haverhill, on condition that said Davis’ ‘ conveyance to us of Shove & Hunt’s patent right shall approve ‘ itself as good in all respects as said Davis’ covenants, in his deed ' of conveyance of this date, have represented it. ‘ December 27, 1832.” ‘ J. & J. Bell.” The cause was tried at May term, 1837, upon the general issue, when it was admitted that the defendants made the…
1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, C. J.
The invention of the patentees in this case is stated in the specification to be an improvement in tanning and manufacturing hides into leather, which consists in a process of working off the hair with greater facility and with more safety than in any other mode of sweating. This process is thus described in the specification :
“ Hang or suspend the hides singly by one edge, in a ‘ tight place, vat, or pit, prepared for the purpose, occasion- ‘ ally changing them edge for edge, after a day or two. A ‘ small opening, or vacancy, should be left in each end of 1 the place, vat, or pit. When there…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Odiorne v. WinkleyU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1814
- Moody v. FiskeU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1820
- Woodcock v. ParkerU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1813