Ross v. Fuller & Warren Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern New York
At Law- Action by patentee to recover royalties from licensee. Tried by the court. On the 23d of September, 1887, the parties made an agreement by which the plaintiff, who was the owner of letters patent for a sanitary privy furnace, 'granted to the defendant an exclusive license to make, use and sell the supposed invention throughout certain specified territory, during the life of the patent. 'The defendant agreed to pay the plaintiff a royalty of ¡¡52.50 for each seat of…
Read the full summary
At Law- Action by patentee to recover royalties from licensee. Tried by the court. On the 23d of September, 1887, the parties made an agreement by which the plaintiff, who was the owner of letters patent for a sanitary privy furnace, 'granted to the defendant an exclusive license to make, use and sell the supposed invention throughout certain specified territory, during the life of the patent. 'The defendant agreed to pay the plaintiff a royalty of ¡¡52.50 for each seat of the furnace used and sold. The defendant further agreed to make up .and return to the plaintiff' at the end of each GO…
1Opinion of the CourtCoxe, District Judge
(after stating the facts). There can he little doubt that if the Massachusetts decree had in terms declared each and all of the claims of the patent void it would have been a complete defense to the cause of action founded upon the written agreements to pay royalty. This proposition is amply sustained by authority and was not controverted at the trial. Herzog v. Heyman, 151 N. Y. 587, 45 N. E. 1127; Marston v. Swett, 82 N. Y. 526; White v. Lee (C. C.) 14 Fed. 789, 791; McKay v. Smith (C. C.) 39 Fed. 556; Walk. Pat. § 307.
It is perfectly plain that in the Massachusetts case the court regarded…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Marston v. . SwettNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- White v. LeeU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1882
- Herzog v. . HeymanNew York Court of Appeals · 1897
- McKay v. SmithU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1889
3Cited by15 opinions
- H. C. White Co. v. Morton E. Converse & Son Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1927
- Drackett Chemical Co. v. Chamberlain Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1933
- Hazeltine Research, Inc. v. Automatic Radio Mfg. Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1948
- Wynne v. AllenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- Appleton Toy & Furniture Co. v. Lehman Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1948
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.