Legal Opinion

Talbot v. Quaker-State Oil Refining Co.

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided March 15, 1939No. 6863PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KIRKPATRICK, District Judge.

The appellants, co-owners of a patent for a non-refillable drum for storing lubri- . eating oil, brought this suit for infringement against the appellee. The Court below, sustaining a special defense, dismissed the bill upon the ground that a judgment of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania to the effect that Talbot, one of the two appellants, had licensed the appellee was conclusive against the parties to this suit under the rule of res judicata; and that ruling presents the question for review.

The essential facts are as follows: In September, 1931, Talbot assigned…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Crown Die & Tool Co. v. Nye Tool & MacHine WorksSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  2. United States National Bank v. Union National BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
  3. McDuffee v. Hestonville, M. & F. Pass. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1908

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Van Products Co. v. General Welding & Fabricating Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
  2. Schering Corporation v. Roussel-Uclaf Sa, Involuntary v. Zeneca Inc. And Zeneca Holdings Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
  3. Piantadosi v. Loew's Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1943
  4. Kenyon v. Automatic Instrument Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1947
  5. John R. Willingham, Star Cutter Company, Joined as v. Norman B. Lawton, and Star Cutter Company, PartyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1977

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

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

Powered by the Exa API