Birdsell v. Shaliol
Supreme Court of the United States
.APPEAL FROM THE' CIRCUIT'COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO. This was a bill in equity for an injunction and damages for the infringement of a patent for an improvement in machines for threshing and hulling clover seed.. The answer set up a former decree as an estoppel.
Read the full summary
.APPEAL FROM THE' CIRCUIT'COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO. This was a bill in equity for an injunction and damages for the infringement of a patent for an improvement in machines for threshing and hulling clover seed.. The answer set up a former decree as an estoppel. The case was heard in the Circuit Court upon a statement of facts agreed by the parties, by which it appeared to be as follows: Birdsell was the inventor and patentee of the improvement, and granted to the Birdsell Manufacturing Company, a corporation of which he was the president and active manager…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Gray
lie recited the facts as above stated, and continued:
The plaintiffs in the present suit, Birdsell, the patentee, in whom is the legal title, and the Birdsell Manufacturing Company, his licensee, in whom is the beneficial interest, make three objections to the decree set up by way of estoppel: 1. That the Birdsell Manufacturing Company was not a party. 2. That the present defendants were not parties.. 3. That only nominal damages were recovered and paid.
1. A licensee of a patent cannot bring a suit in his own name, at law or in equity, for its infringement by. a stranger; an action at law for…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Gayler v. WilderSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
- Root v. Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Lovejoy v. MurraySupreme Court of the United States · 1866
- Littlefield v. PerrySupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Adams v. BurkeSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by126 opinions
- Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Waterman v. MacKenzieSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Aro Manufacturing Co. v. Convertible Top Replacement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Tilghman v. ProctorSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Independent Wireless Telegraph Co. v. Radio Corp. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
121 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.