Huber v. Guggenheim
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
TMs cause comes up for final hearing in equity upon pleadings and proofs. The complainants are co-partners in business, and residents of St. Gall, Switzerland, their firm name being Huber & Kellet. The defendants, Meyer, Isaac, Daniel, Morris, and Solomon Guggenheim, are eo-partnors carrying on business in the city of New York under the firm name of M. Guggenheim’s Sons.
Read the full summary
TMs cause comes up for final hearing in equity upon pleadings and proofs. The complainants are co-partners in business, and residents of St. Gall, Switzerland, their firm name being Huber & Kellet. The defendants, Meyer, Isaac, Daniel, Morris, and Solomon Guggenheim, are eo-partnors carrying on business in the city of New York under the firm name of M. Guggenheim’s Sons. On May 16, 1889, as the testimony shows, — the complaint erroneously gives the date as May 18th, — complainants and defendants entered into a contract in writing at St. Gall. This contract recited that defendants were the…
1Opinion of the CourtLacombe, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts). The claim of the Eice patent is for “a bolt of embroidery containing two or more rows separated by a line of perforations adapted to be folded and secured by ties at the folds, substantially as described.” The specification contains the statement:
“I propose to manufacture the goods with a line of perforations between each row of embroidery at or near the edge of each row, as may be requisite, according to the purpose for which the goods are intended, for the purpose of separating tlie rows of embroidery by simply tearing off each strip from the bolt as required. To…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Durkin v. CobleighMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Rackemann v. Riverbank Improvement Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1896
- Guggenheim v. KirchhoferCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1895
3Cited by9 opinions
- Vulcan Metals Co. v. Simmons Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1918
- Eastern States Petroleum Co. v. Universal Oil Products Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1938
- Wright v. FoxIndiana Court of Appeals · 1913
- Marshall v. Hillsboro Garden TractsOregon Supreme Court · 1915
- Alder v. GuggenheimU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1898
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.