Legal Opinion

Nash v. Lull

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided September 15, 1869PublishedCited by 26 opinions

Contract on a promissory note dated March 6, 1868, for $175, payable to the bearer, six months after date, with interest.

Read the full summary

Contract on a promissory note dated March 6, 1868, for $175, payable to the bearer, six months after date, with interest. Writ dated September 17,1868. At the trial, in the superior court, before Brigham, C. J., the defendant admitted the making of the note, for the considera tian of a license from the patentees, of the same date with tne note, to use and vend in Berkshire an “ Improved Animal Churn Power Device,” under letters patent from the United States, bearing date of May 9, 1865; and on this admission the plaintiff rested his case. The defendant put in evidence which tended to show…

1Opinion of the CourtGray, J.

Letters patent of the United States can be lawfully granted only for new and useful inventions; and are but primd facie evidence of the novelty and utility of the invention described. U. S. St. 1837, c. 45. Corning v. Burden, 15 How. 270, 271. All that is required to make an invention useful, under the patent laws, is that it should be capable of being applied to some practical and beneficial purpose, and not be frivolous, or injurious to the well being or morals of society. If it is useful in this sense, it is patentable, and the degree of its utility or practical value does not affect the…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Corning v. BurdenSupreme Court of the United States · 1854
  2. Wetherbee v. PotterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
  3. Sherman v. Champlain Transportation Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1858
  4. Rich v. HotchkissSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1844
  5. McClure v. JeffreyIndiana Supreme Court · 1856

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Pratt v. Paris Gas Light & Coke Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1897
  2. David v. ParkMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
  3. Aronson v. OrlovMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
  4. Gloucester Isinglass & Glue Co. v. Russia Cement Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
  5. Victory Bottle Capping Mach. Co. v. O. & J. Mach. Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1922

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

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

Powered by the Exa API