Legal Opinion

Bragg-Kliesrath Corporation v. Farrell

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided December 16, 1929No. 93PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MACK, Circuit Judge.

In the operation of internal combustion automobile engines, the engine pistons suck into the cylinders successive charges of -an. explosive, mixture -.'of- air and-liquid fuel-delivered through a *847carburetor to tbe intake manifold under tbe control of a throttle valve. When the engine is running at maximum speed the throttle valve is practically wide open, the mixture passing to the engine cylinders is at approximately normal atmospheric pressure, and no appreciable rarifieation or vacuum exists in the manifold. As the throttle valve is closed, the suction passage through…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Loom Co. v. HigginsSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
  2. Boyden Power-Brake Co. v. Westinghouse Westinghouse v. Boyden Power-Brake Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1898
  3. Westinghouse v. Boyden Power Brake Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1898
  4. Leeds & Catlin Company v. Victor Talking Machine Company (No. 2)Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
  5. Western Electric Co. v. LaRueSupreme Court of the United States · 1891

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Monsanto Chemical Co. v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1944
  2. Plasser American Corp. v. Canron, Inc.District Court, D. South Carolina · 1980
  3. Alexander Anderson, Inc. v. EastmanDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1936
  4. Ruben Condenser Co. v. Copeland Refrigeration Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 1935
  5. Christensen v. Bragg-Kliesrath Corp.District Court, N.D. Indiana · 1937

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

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

Powered by the Exa API