Legal Opinion
Claude Siebring D/B/A Siebring Manufacturing Company, and Owen Siebring v. Charles W. Hansen and Afsco, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Decided June 28, 1965No. 17814PublishedCited by 42 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MATTHES, Circuit Judge.
This is a civil contempt proceeding in which the trial court, Honorable William C. Hanson, found Claude Siebring and Owen Siebring in contempt on the ground that they had continued to infringe a patent subsequent to and in violation of a previous court decree. 1 The basic question presented here is whether the court committed error in holding the Seibrings in contempt. The issue of infringement was also injected in the trial and it too was determined adversely to the Siebrings. The judgment of the court in this regard is also challenged by appellant.
The court’s…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- United States v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
- System Federation No. 91 v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Leman v. Krentler-Arnold Hinge Last Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Pope Manufacturing Co. v. GormullySupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Park-In-Theatres, Inc. v. PerkinsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1951
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Octane Fitness, LLC v. Icon HealthSupreme Court of the United States · 2014
- Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2014
- High Tech Medical Instrumentation, Inc. v. New Image Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- V. T. A., Inc. v. Airco, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1979
- Herbert Rosenthal Jewelry Corp. v. Edward and Lucy Kalpakian, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.