Legal Opinion
Smith v. Springdale Amusement Park, Ltd.
District Court, S.D. Ohio
Decided June 23, 1928No. 485PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HICKENLOOPER, District Judge.
The motion to dismiss the bill of complaint as to the individual defendants H. C. Records and G. W. Heintz must be granted. These defendants are not inhabitants of this district, nor does it appear that they have committed acts of infringement and have a regular and established place of business here. The motion to dismiss the bill as regards the individual defendants Paul M. Williams and Gerald Brown must be overruled. *93From the affidavits on file, it appears that the defendant Brown has participated in the alleged infringement by use, by acting as a judge of dog…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Eibel Process Co. v. Minnesota & Ontario Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1923
- McClain v. OrtmayerSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Winans v. DenmeadSupreme Court of the United States · 1854
- I. T. S. Rubber Co. v. Essex Rubber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Weber Electric Co. v. E. H. Freeman Electric Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1921
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Buchanan v. Wyeth Hardware & Manufacturing Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1931
- Endevco Corporation v. Chicago Dynamic Industries, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1967
- Magic City Kennel Club, Inc. v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1930
- Pearson v. Washingtonian Pub. Co.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1938