Legal Opinion

Aluminum Colors Inc. v. Empire Plating Co.

District Court, N.D. Ohio

Decided December 28, 1933No. 4607PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WEST, District Judge.

This matter has been submitted on an order requiring respondents Clark, Hammer, and Foley, to show cause why they should not be punished for contempt for violating an injunction which followed a decree pro eonfesso in plaintiff’s favor, in a patent suit. The motion of respondents to quash the order was not insisted upon and is denied.

The injunction was directed to the defendant the Empire Plating Company, its officers, agents, attorneys, privies, servants, employees, and all others acting by or under its direction or authority, its successors and assigns. After it was…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Alemite Mfg. Corporation v. StaffCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1930
  2. Hoover Co. v. Exchange Vacuum Cleaner Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1932
  3. United States Playing-Card Co. v. SpaldingU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1899
  4. Hamilton v. Diamond Drill & Machine Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1905

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Regal Knitwear Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Shipping Room Suppliers, Inc. v. Schoenlaub, Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Hamilton County1951

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

Powered by the Exa API