Legal Opinion

Hussong Dyeing Mach. Co. v. Philadelphia Drying Machinery Co.

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania

Decided September 30, 1909Published

In Equity. On motion to compel witness to answer question.

1Opinion of the Court

J. B. McPHERSON, District Judge.

The witness is a patent expert and was called by the complainant. Id is direct examination was confined to a description and explanation of the inventions in suit, a description of the defendants’ machines, and the expression of an opinion that these machines infringed the claims relied upon. His answer to the third question of this examination simply described the devices of the patents. On cross-examination he was asked for the first time whether he was acquainted with the British patent to Pollock, and to this he answered, “Yes.” Thereupon the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Thomson-Houston Electric Co. v. H. W. Johns Mfg. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1900
  2. Æolian Co. v. Simpson-Crawford Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1907

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API