Legal Opinion

Enterprise Ry. Equipment Co. v. Wine Ry. Appliance Co.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided May 14, 1935No. 6640PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MOORMAN, .Circuit Judge.

On the former appeal this court held claim 2 of the Kadel patent, No. 1,434,953, valid and infringed. 25 F.(2d) 236. On the accounting had pursuant to the court’s mandate after remand the District Court awarded damages to the appellee, owner of the patent, in a sum representing the profits made on sales of the infringing device from November 7, 1922 — the date the patent was issued.

The patented device was never made or sold by the appellee or any licensee, and the first actual notice appellant had of the patent and its infringement was when the counterclaim was filed…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Dunlap v. SchofieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
  2. Crosby Steam Gage & Valve Co. v. Consolidated Safety Valve Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
  3. L. P. Larson, Jr., Co. v. Wm. Wrigley, Jr., Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1928
  4. Parker Rust Proof Co. v. Ford Motor Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1928
  5. Bethlehem Steel Co. v. Churchward International Steel Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1920

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Horvath v. McCord Radiator & Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1938
  2. Schnadig Corporation v. Gaines Manufacturing Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1980
  3. Wm. Bros Boiler and Manufacturing Co. (By Change of Name Now Bros, Incorporated) v. Gibson-Stewart Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1963
  4. Horvath v. McCord Radiator & Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API