Legal Opinion
Tate v. Lewis
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided December 17, 1954No. Civ. 53-507PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ALDRICH, District Judge.
This is an action of contract, based on diversity of citizenship. The plaintiff, owner of two patents, known as the Tate and Haskins patents, for the coating of pipe in situ with a lining of cement, en tered into a rather complicated agreement under seal with the defendants in October, 1938. I shall give effect to paragraph Twenty-third and rule that it was a Massachusetts agreement. The defendants for ten years were to pay a certain portion of their profits, and were also to pay royalties in an amount determined by linear and other measurements of all pipe treated. If…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Brackett v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
- E. R. Squibb & Sons v. Chemical Foundation, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1937
- Thurston v. HamblinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
- Dwight & Lloyd Sintering Co. v. American Ore Reclamation Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1939
3Cited by7 opinions
- George Fujimoto v. Rio Grande Pickle Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
- April Productions, Inc. v. G. Schirmer, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1955
- McLeod v. CrawfordNebraska Supreme Court · 1964
- Ar-Tik Systems, Inc. v. Dairy Queen, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1962
- Thys Co. v. BrulotteWashington Supreme Court · 1963
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.