Legal Opinion
Philadelphia Brief Case Co. v. Specialty Leather Products Co.
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided March 10, 1958No. Civ. A. No. 325-55PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HARTSHORNE, District Judge.
Defendant applies for attorney’s fees in this patent litigation, where it was successful both on the trial and on appeal; Philadelphia Brief Case Company v. Specialty Leather Products Co., Inc., D.C.N.J.1956, 145 F.Supp. 425; 3 Cir., 1957, 242 F.2d 511. The statute in that regard, 35 U.S.C. § 285, provides:
“The court in exceptional cases may award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party.”
In short, the award of attorney’s fees in patent cases is the exception, not the rule, the exception to exist where there is “unfairness or bad faith”, or the like, on the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Park-In-Theatres, Inc. v. PerkinsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1951
- Maddrix v. DizeCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1946
- Pennsylvania Crusher Co. v. Bethlehem Steel Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1951
- Laufenberg, Inc. v. Goldblatt Bros., IncCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1951
- Philadelphia Brief Case Co. v. Specialty Leather Products Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1956
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Hairline Creations, Inc. v. Diane KefalasCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1981
- Hoy v. Newburg Homes, Inc.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1959