Humiston v. Stainthorp
Supreme Court of the United States
Stainthorp and Seguine had filed a bill in the Circuit Court for the Northern District of -New York, against Humiston, for infringing a patent for moulding candles; and had obtained a decree against him. The decree was that' the complainants were entitled to a permanent injunction, and for an account' of gains and profits, and that, the cause be referred to a master to take and state the amount and-report to the court.
Read the full summary
Stainthorp and Seguine had filed a bill in the Circuit Court for the Northern District of -New York, against Humiston, for infringing a patent for moulding candles; and had obtained a decree against him. The decree was that' the complainants were entitled to a permanent injunction, and for an account' of gains and profits, and that, the cause be referred to a master to take and state the amount and-report to the court. A motion was now made to dismiss the cause for want of jurisdiction. An appeal lies only from a final decree; this is an interlocutory one. A final decree in equity is one…
1Opinion of the Court
Mr. Justice'NELSON
delivered the opinion of the court, and after stating the case said:
The decree is not final within the act of Congress providing for appeals to this court, according to a long and well-settled clasp of cases, some of which we only need refer to in disposing of the case.*
MOTION GRANTED.
The Palmyra, 10 Wheaton, 502; Barnard et al. v. Gibson, 7 Howard. 650; Crawford v. Points, 13 Id. 11; Craighead v. Wilson, 18 Id. 199 Beebe et al. v. Russell, 19 Id. 283.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- The PalmyraSupreme Court of the United States · 1825
3Cited by1 opinion
- Humiston v. StainthorpSupreme Court of the United States · 1865