Vulcan Detinning Co. v. American Can Co.
New Jersey Court of Chancery
On demurrer to the bill and upon a rule to show cause why an injunction should not issue restraining the defendants from utilizing a trade secret.
Read the full summary
On demurrer to the bill and upon a rule to show cause why an injunction should not issue restraining the defendants from utilizing a trade secret. The bill sets out that the Electro Tinfabriek, a foreign co-partnership, was in 1898 the owner of a secret process’ for detinning tin scrap; that on February 19th, 1899, the Tinfabriek assigned the secret process to A. Kerns & Company and their assigns, giving them a statement in writing of such secret process and of the manner of erecting plants for its utilization; that Kerns & Company, on April 23d, 1898, assigned the said process to the Yulcan…
1Opinion of the Court
Reed, V. C.
The arguments are directed to two questions — first, whether the bill is demurrable; and second, if not, then whether upon *247the affidavits submitted a preliminary injunction should go. I will consider the questions in their order.
The first ground assigned by the demurrants is that the bill discloses no ground for equitable relief.
The particular criticism upon the bill under this head is that there is no allegation showing that either of the partners composing the copartnership mentioned as Electro Tinfabriek were the inventors or discoverers of the secret process, or that they trace…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Fowle v. ParkSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Ely v. New Mexico & Arizona RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Tode v. . GrossNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- O. & W. Thum Co. v. TloczynskiMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
- Tudor v. Cambridge Water WorksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1861
3Cited by6 opinions
- John D. Park & Sons Co. v. HartmanCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1907
- Wearly v. Federal Trade CommissionDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1978
- Hartman v. John D. Park & Sons Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Kentucky · 1906
- Radium Remedies Co. v. WeissSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
- Brinkman v. RickCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1929
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.