Legal Opinion

Kneass v. Schuylkill Bank

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania

Decided October 15, 1820PublishedCited by 5 opinions

This was an action for the violation of the plaintiff’s patent right [granted April 28, 1815].

1Opinion of the CourtWashington, Circuit Justice

(charging jury). This is an action to recover damages for a violation of the plaintiff’s patent right. The declaration states the granting of the patent to the plaintiff, as the inventor of a new and useful improvement in printing on the hack or reverse face of bank notes or bills, as an additional security against counterfeit-ure; and the breach laid in the declaration is, that the defendants did, without the consent or license of the plaintiff, make, devise, use, and sell the thing so invented, in violation, &c. To this declaration the defendants have pleaded the general issue, without…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Hogg v. EmersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1848
  2. Brown v. Texas Cactus Hedge Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1885
  3. Hotchkiss v. GreenwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
  4. In Re Kuriappan P. Alappat, Edward E. Averill and James G. LarsenCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994
  5. In Re Kuriappan P. Alappat, Edward E. Averill and James G. LarsenCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994

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

Powered by the Exa API