Legal Opinion

Typekrafters, Inc. v. City of Philadelphia

Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County

Decided December 2, 1938No. 2868PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Rosen, J.,

Plaintiff is in the business of typesetting and machine composition which business is conducted in the following manner as described in the bill of complaint.

Certain large printing houses in Philadelphia have facilities, either linotype, monotype, or otherwise, for the setting of type for use in presses. This composition can be done either by hand or through the use of linotype, monotype, or other machine methods, which use raw type metal and through machine operations automatically convert it into finished material available for final press work.

Small independent printing houses…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. New York Rapid Transit Corp. v. City of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Blauner's, Inc. v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  3. Mendoza Fur Dyeing Works, Inc. v. TaylorNew York Court of Appeals · 1936
  4. Howitt v. Street & Smith Publications, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1937

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Superior Type, Inc. v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1958

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API