Marston v. . Swett
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal, from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon a verdict (Reported below, 4 Ilun, 153.) The complaint in this action alleged, in substance, that prior to October 1, 1869, plaintiff and defendants were joint owners of a patented invention known as “Hawk’s Auxiliary Air Chamber for stoves, heaters and furnaces,” and on that day it was agreed between them that in…
Read the full summary
Appeal, from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon a verdict (Reported below, 4 Ilun, 153.) The complaint in this action alleged, in substance, that prior to October 1, 1869, plaintiff and defendants were joint owners of a patented invention known as “Hawk’s Auxiliary Air Chamber for stoves, heaters and furnaces,” and on that day it was agreed between them that in consideration that plaintiff would not license others to use said invention but give defendants the exclusive right, they would…
1Opinion of the Court
Earl, J:
It is claimed by the defendants that the contract sued on is void under the statute of frauds, as it was not to be ■ performed within a year and was not in writing. A contract,. valid in form, is set out in the complaint, and it does not there appear that it was not in writing. It was not necessary to ■ allege that it was in writing. For the purposes of the complaint that will be presumed. If the contract alleged in the complaint had been denied, or the statute of frauds had been set up as a defence, then it would have been necessary upon the trial to prove that the contract was in…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Freeman v. . FreemanNew York Court of Appeals · 1870
- Castle v. . NoyesNew York Court of Appeals · 1856
- Bouchaud v. DiasNew York Supreme Court · 1846
- Converse v. KelloggNew York Supreme Court · 1850
- McClure v. JeffreyIndiana Supreme Court · 1856
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by88 opinions
- Dixon v. DukeIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
- Fleischmann v. . SternNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Automatic Radio Mfg. Co. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1949
- H. C. White Co. v. Morton E. Converse & Son Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1927
- Drackett Chemical Co. v. Chamberlain Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1933
83 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.