Hall v. Stern
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
In Equity.
1Opinion of the Court
Wallace, J.. The proofs in this accounting do not show that the complainants lost the sale of their patented mirrors to the extent that *789similar mirrors were sold by the defendants. Both parties were merchants in the city of New York. The complainants sold the mirrors mainly to retailers in that city. The defendants were retailers of general fancy goods. ■ Up to the time when the defendants began to import mirrors and compete in the retail trade with complainants’ customers, they had bought exclusively of the complainants, and their purchases wore from $1,000 to $1,200 annually. They imported…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Seymour v. McCormickSupreme Court of the United States · 1854
- Hostetter v. VowinkleU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Nebraska · 1871
3Cited by5 opinions
- Livesay Window Company, Inc. v. Livesay Industries, Inc., and Everett G. Livesay Window Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1958
- Walter Baker & Co. v. SlackCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1904
- American Can Co. v. Goldee Mfg. Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1927
- De Laski & Thropp Circular Woven Tire Co. v. Empire Rubber & Tire Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1916
- Kinner v. ShepardU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut · 1901