Legal Opinion

Shipp v. Schmitt

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 21, 1919No. Appeal, No. 5PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal, No. 5, March T., 1919, by defendants, from judgment of C. P. Luzerne Co., June T., 1915, No. 580, on verdict for plaintiff in case of M. W. Shipp v. Schmitt & Murphy. Assumpsit on written contract for the sale of a patent. Before Carman, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Verdict for plaintiff for $329.52 and judgment thereon. Defendants appealed.

Read the full summary

Appeal, No. 5, March T., 1919, by defendants, from judgment of C. P. Luzerne Co., June T., 1915, No. 580, on verdict for plaintiff in case of M. W. Shipp v. Schmitt & Murphy. Assumpsit on written contract for the sale of a patent. Before Carman, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Verdict for plaintiff for $329.52 and judgment thereon. Defendants appealed. Errors assigned were various rulings on evidence and the instructions quoted in the opinion of the Superior Court.

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Keller, J.,

The appellee was the inventor of an improvement in hose clamps, upon which, on August 18, 1913, letters patent had been allowed but not yet issued. On that date, he assigned a two-thirds interest in the patent to the appellants for the sum of one thousand dollars, of which two hundred dollars was paid in cash and the balance was to be paid (as set out in the receipt evidencing the transaction) as follows: “Three hundred ($300) dollars when the patent has been issued in accordance with assignment dated this date and forwarded to the patent office at Washington, D. C., to…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Burke v. Maxwell's AdministratorsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1876
  2. Leibig v. SteinerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1880
  3. Price v. HamscherSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
  4. Blumenthal v. GreenSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
  5. Repsher v. WattsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1851

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Heymann v. Electric Service Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  2. Sanders v. StotesburySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  3. Commonwealth v. GrossSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  4. Sanders v. StotesburySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API