Legal Opinion
Modrey v. AMERICAN GAGE & MACHINE COMPANY
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided March 6, 1972No. 70 Civ. 3847PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BONSAL, District Judge.
Plaintiff moves for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, on the ground that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, there being no genuine issue of material fact. In the alternative, plaintiff moves pursuant to Rule 56(d) for an order specifying the facts which are uncontroverted.
Plaintiff, doing business as Modrey Associates and owner of Patent No. 3,-448,894 issued on June 10, 1969, instituted this action against defendant, American Gage & Machine Company, on September 3, 1970 to recover damages in the amount of $15,000…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Brulotte v. Thys Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Xerox Corporation v. Dennison Manufacturing CompanyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1971
- American Safety Table Co. v. SchreiberCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1969
- Rock-Ola Mfg. Corp. v. Filben Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1948
- Florida Canada Corporation v. Union Carbide & Carbon CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1960
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Pitney Bowes, Inc., Cross-Appellee v. Celina Mestre, Personal Representative of the Estate of Luis Mestre, Deceased, Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1983
- Henry J. Modrey v. American Gage & MacHine CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1973
- Industrial Promotion Co. v. Versa Products, Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1991
- Industrial Promotion Co. v. Versa Products, Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1991