Morse Arms Manufacturing Co. v. United States
United States Court of Claims
The Reporters’ statement of the ease: The vital question sought to be raised by these motions was whether and to what extent the court will entertain jurisdiction ■of patent cases. The facts necessary to an understanding of the case fully appear in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court · DavisDavis, J.
The plaintiffs claim as assignees of the inventor and patentee of a patented article. Their original petition was filed Decern-*298ber 9, 1874. At tbe same term tbe defendants answered by a general traverse and by setting up tbe statute of limitations.. Tbe plaintiffs then filed an amended petition, upon wbicb they now rest.
Tbe amended petition sets forth that tbe claimants are a corporation existing under tbe laws of New York, and that at a date not given, but wbicb must have been prior to September-13, 1858, tbe plaintiffs’ assignor agreed that if experiments with bis patented article should…
Also in this document: Opinion of the Court · Davis.
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Den Ex Dem. Murray v. Hoboken Land & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1856
- Langford v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts v. Town of PawletSupreme Court of the United States · 1830
- Smith v. MasonSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- Jackson v. AllenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Cape Ann Granite Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1885
- Little v. District of ColumbiaUnited States Court of Claims · 1884
- Farnham v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1913
- Cole v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1894
- Pratt v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1938
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.