New Jersey Zinc Co. v. Singmaster
District Court, S.D. New York
1Opinion of the Court
CAFFEY, District Judge.
In a case, such as this, that involves consideration or ascertainment of intention or mental state or condition, difficulty is almost always-experienced. Here also there are dif ficult questions of law. In this case we reach a point where the law governing patents and the law governing contracts come into contact. In order fairly to consider or determine the questions of law, therefore, it is essential very carefully to discriminate with which branch of the law we are concerned. As counsel have indicated in their briefs, the subject involved is one upon which there has…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- International News Service v. Associated PressSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- McClain v. OrtmayerSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- The Distilled SpiritsSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- Temco Electric Motor Co. v. Apco Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1928
- Standard Parts Co. v. PeckSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Smoley v. New Jersey Zinc Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1938
- Technitrol, Inc. v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1971
- Guth v. Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1934
- US Colloid Mill Corporation v. MyersDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1934
- American Investment Co. of Ill. v. LichtensteinDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 1955
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.