Legal Opinion
Cold Metal Process Co. v. United Engineering & Foundry Co.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Decided January 28, 1935No. 2991PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
McVICAR, District Judge.
Plaintiff, in its bill, seeks an injunction to restrain the defendant from the prosecution of certain suits in other federal District Courts, that this court, by reference to arbitration, master, or otherwise, determine the amount due to plaintiff under a certain agreement with defendant, and for the determination of future payments thereunder. Defendant filed an answer to the bill. The suit is now before us on the motion of plaintiff for a preliminary injunction to restrain the prosecution of the suits specifically referred to hereinafter and the rule to show cause…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Independent Wireless Telegraph Co. v. Radio Corp. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- De Forest Radio Telephone Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Cold Metal Process Co. v. UNITED STATES ENG. & FOUNDRY CO.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1933
- United Engineering & Foundry Co. v. Cold Metal Process Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1934
- Keystone Type Foundry v. Fastpress Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1921
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Cold Metal Process Co. v. United Engineering & Foundry Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1956
- E. W. Bliss Co. v. Cold Metal Process Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1939
- Cold Metal Process Co. v. United Engineering & Foundry Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1939
- Cold Metal Process Co. v. United Engineering & Foundry Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1951
- Cold Metal Process Co. v. United Engineering & Foundry Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1956
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.