Legal Opinion

Hartman v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided January 8, 1900No. 19240PublishedCited by 4 opinions

On the Proofs. The Reporters' statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. That the petitioner, Henry Hartman, is a citizen of the United States, residing at Germantown, N. Y., and is the owner of the claim herein. II.. That on the 23d day of December, 1879, letters patent of the United States, No. 222899, for improvement in carbine holders were duly issued to him, and the said letters patent are now owned and held by him. III.

Read the full summary

On the Proofs. The Reporters' statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. That the petitioner, Henry Hartman, is a citizen of the United States, residing at Germantown, N. Y., and is the owner of the claim herein. II.. That on the 23d day of December, 1879, letters patent of the United States, No. 222899, for improvement in carbine holders were duly issued to him, and the said letters patent are now owned and held by him. III. On July 19, 1879, the use of the carbine holder shown and described in the said letters patent was approved by the…

1Opinion of the Court

Nott, Ch. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court:

This is an action brought to recover royalty on a patented device. It appears that 721 carbine holders were manufactured by the Government for use in the Army more than six years before the bringing of this action.. On the part of the claimant it is contended that these holders were in military use presúmptively after their manufacture and within the six years. On the part of the defendants it is contended that there is no evidence whatever of actual use. The resulting question is, whether the claim is barred by the statute of limitations.

The…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. United States v. Berdan Fire-Arms Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1895
  2. Berdan Fire-Arms Manufacturing Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1890
  3. Gill v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1890
  4. Butler v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1888
  5. Patterson v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1886

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Withers v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1930
  2. Lowrey v. TerritoryHawaii Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Cygnet Manufacturing Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1925
  4. Nitro Chemical Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1931

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

Powered by the Exa API