Legal Opinion
Long Manufacturing Co. v. Holliday
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Decided May 27, 1957No. Nos. 7383, 7384PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HAYNSWORTH, Circuit Judge.
The parties in these two cases, involving interrelated factual situations, are, together with their associates and licensees, owners of two separate patents issued on tobacco harvesters. Their conflicting interests led to the institution of these two actions in which each patentee maintains that his patent is valid and infringed by the other patentee and his licensee.
The two cases were consolidated for trial after which the District Court held that the device of the Holliday patent No. 2,672,248 issued March 16, 1954, was a generic or pioneer invention entitled to a…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Elizabeth v. Pavement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Smith & Griggs Manufacturing Co. v. SpragueSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Picard v. United Aircraft CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1942
- Dean A. Lyon v. Bausch & Lomb Optical Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1955
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Marston v. JC Penney CompanyDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 1971
- Milliken Research Corp. v. Dan River, Inc.District Court, W.D. Virginia · 1982
- State v. MercerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
- Diamond International Corp. v. Maryland Fresh Eggs, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 1974
- Long Manufacturing Company, Inc., Long Tobacco Harvesting Company, Inc., and W. R. Long v. Jim Brown Holliday and Harrington Manufacturing Company, Inc., Harrington Manufacturing Company, Inc., J. J. Harrington, and Jim Brown Holliday v. Long Manufacturing Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1957
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.