Legal Opinion
Baseball Display Co. v. Star Ballplayer Co.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided September 24, 1929No. Nos. 4030, 4143PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WOOLLEY, Circuit Judge.
The District Court, having found the plaintiff’s patent No. 1,321,940 valid and infringed (D. C.) 8 F.(2d) 46, referred the case to a master for accounting. After a sharp contest the master awarded the plaintiff $12,500 for profits, damages and interest. Prom the decree, which embodied the master’s report without change, both parties have appealed; the plaintiff because the award is inadequate, the defendants because it is excessive. We shall not state the issues of this protracted and complicated accounting except where they concern principles of law. These we shall…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Tilghman v. ProctorSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Carnegie Steel Co. v. Cambria Iron Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co. v. Wagner Electric & Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Westinghouse v. New York Air Brake Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1905
- Continuous Glass Press Co. v. Schmertz Wire Glass Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1915
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2016
- Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Overman Cushion Tire Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1937
- Trio Process Corporation v. L. Goldstein's Sons, Inc. And Metal Bank of America, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1981
- Swan Carburetor Co. v. Nash Motors Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1943
- Gotham Silk Hosiery Co. v. Artcraft Silk Hosiery Mills, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1942