Legal Opinion

Carroll v. Goldschmidt

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided December 1, 1897PublishedCited by 17 opinions

Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. This was a suit in equity by Carroll, as trustee, against Groldschmidt and others, for alleged infringement of certain letters patent for warp knitting machines. The circuit court rendered a decree for the complainant (80 Fed. 520), and the defendants have appealed.

1Opinion of the Court

WALLACE, Circuit Judge.

In disposing of this cause we do not lind it necessary to consider wind her the conclusions of (he court below as to the validity of the two patents in suit were correct or not. The record abundantly shows that the property in the inventions claimed in both patents belonged originally to Bevis and Payne, jointly, as co-partners, by the style of il. B. Payne & Co.; that it then became part of the assets of the business carried on by them under the style of J. B. Whitehall & Co.; (hat it passed to Bevis exclusively upon the purchase; by him of the assets and good will of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Campbell v. . HallNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
  2. Ingersoll v. JewettU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern New York · 1879

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Cressler v. BrownSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
  2. Village Mills Co. v. Houston Oil Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1916
  3. Western Electric Co. v. HammondCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1943
  4. Homer v. LesterSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
  5. De Watteville v. SimsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914

12 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