Tremaine v. Hitchcock & Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
On cross appeals from the Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York. Hitchcock & Co., owners by assignment of a patent to one Carpenter, which had been twice reissued to themselves, filed a bill in the court below against Tremaine and others, vendors of organs generally and other musical instruments, to enjoin their sale of what was known as a “ tremolo attachment,” an appeudage sometimes made to organs; the purpose of which is to make a tremolo or vibratory note,…
Read the full summary
On cross appeals from the Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York. Hitchcock & Co., owners by assignment of a patent to one Carpenter, which had been twice reissued to themselves, filed a bill in the court below against Tremaine and others, vendors of organs generally and other musical instruments, to enjoin their sale of what was known as a “ tremolo attachment,” an appeudage sometimes made to organs; the purpose of which is to make a tremolo or vibratory note, preserving at the same time, as far as possible, its smoothness, fulness, and power. This tremolo attachment was no…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Strong
We think that the order of the court directing that the record be amended by inserting in the bill an averment of the second reissue was properly made, under the circumstances of the case, though made after the final decree. For practically the rights of the complainants under the second reissue, and the defendants’ infringement thereof were in issue under the auswer and the replication. The amendment deprived the defendants of no rights which they had not enjoyed during all the progress of the trial. It may well be denominated only an amendment of form, because it introduced no other cause…
2Cited by43 opinions
- Tilghman v. ProctorSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Graffam v. BurgessSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Hardin v. BoydSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Loos v. . WilkinsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- C. A. Briggs Co. v. National Wafer Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.