Legal Opinion
Canfield v. Blaw-Knox Co.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided August 12, 1938No. 6272PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DAVIS, Circuit Judge.
The plaintiff has appealed from a decree of the. District Court dismissing his bill “for want of equity”.
The question at issue is whether or not the defendant, manufactured and sold concrete agitators embodying an invention confidentially disclosed to it by the plaintiff-inventor. The plaintiff is not entitled to recover under the evidence in this case unless there existed, (1) a patentable invention, . (2) a trust relationship, and (3) a usurpation of that invention by the defendant.
The alleged invention relates to a concrete agitator (a mechanism mounted on and driven…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Speedry Chemical Products, Inc. And Sidney Rosenthal v. The Carter's Ink CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1962
- Smoley v. New Jersey Zinc Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1939
- Bolt Associates, Inc. v. Alpine Geophysical Associates, Inc. And Walter C. BeckmannCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1966
- De Filippis v. Chrysler CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1944
- Lakoff v. Lionel Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1955