Legal Opinion

Mouat v. Bamlet

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 13, 1900PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error to Wayne; Erazer, J. Assumpsit by John D. Mouat against Frank H. Bamlet to recover an amount claimed to be due upon a contract for the manufacture and sale of a patented heater. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtHooker, J.

Mouat was the holder of letters patent for a hot-water heater, and on the 2d day of October, 1890, made a contract with Bamlet whereby he granted to Bam*346let a license to manufacture and sell heaters under said patent, and to manage and control their manufacture and sale. Both were to sell heaters, and article 5 of the contract provided that Bamlet should pay to Mouat $25 for each heater shipped to fill' orders procured by him or his agent, and $15 for each heater shipped to fill orders from, other sources, and these sums were to constitute said Mouat’s royalty in full. On May 1, 1894, a new…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Marx v. KingMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Mitchell v. RendeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1947
  3. Jacob v. CummingsMichigan Supreme Court · 1921

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

Powered by the Exa API