Gloucester Isinglass & Glue Co. v. Russia Cement Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Bill in equity, for the specific performance of an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant. Hearing before Knowlton, J., who reported the case for the consideration of the full court, such decree to be entered as law and equity might require. The facts appear in the opinion. The case was argued at the bar in November, 1890, and afterwards, in June, 1891, was submitted on the briefs to all the judges, except Barker, J.
1Opinion of the CourtKnowlton, J.
The plaintiff and the defendant corporations, which had been engaged in litigation with each other as to the alleged infringement of a patent owned by the plaintiff, supposing the validity of the patent fully established, and believing that they would be able practically to control the profitable manufacture of fish glue, entered into a contract with each other by which the defendant was to pay a certain sum for damages, and one half of the costs of the suits, and was to be allowed the use of the patent. Each party was to conduct its own establishment, and they were to unite in the purchase…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Somerby v. BuntinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
- Nash v. LullMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- Central Shade Roller Co. v. CushmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
- Harlow v. PutnamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
- Florence Sewing Machine Co. v. Grover & Baker Sewing Machine Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1872
3Cited by29 opinions
- United States v. Addyston Pipe & Steel Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1898
- Commonwealth v. DyerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922
- Texas Co. v. Central Fuel Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1912
- Butterick Publishing Co. v. FisherMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- Thompson v. Burke Engineering Sales Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1960
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.