Legal Opinion

Dawn Equipment Company, Plaintiff-Counterclaim and James H. Bassett, Counterclaim v. Micro-Trak Systems, Incorporated

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Decided August 4, 1999No. 98-2010PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER, Circuit Judge.

This diversity case might have been avoided had the parties taken more pains with drafting the contract here in dispute. Dawn Equipment Company (“Dawn”), a Minnesota corporation, sold Micro-Trak Systems, Inc. (“Micro-Trak”), an Illinois corporation, a patent for a device called a “Harvestyield,” an invention designed to measure the flow of grain through a combine while “on the go” or while the combine is moving and operating. The contract specified that Dawn was to be paid at a higher rate if the patent was “suitable” and at a lower rate if it was not.…

2Cases cited27 opinions

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
Christianson v. Colt Industries Operating Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
Pfaff v. Wells Electronics, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1998
Brookfield Trade Center, Inc. v. County of RamseySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1998

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

3Cited by41 opinions

Ann M. Hostetler v. Quality Dining, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2000
Frank M. Rosetto, Individually and as Representatives of a Class of Similarly Situated Persons v. Pabst Brewing Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2000
Beanstalk Group, Inc. v. Am General Corporation and General Motors CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2002
Liu v. T & H Machine, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1999
Linda Call, on Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Ameritech Management Pension PlanCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2007

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