Cheatham Electric Switching Device Co. v. Transit Development Co.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of New York. Bill by the Cheatham Electric Switching Device Company against the Transit Development Company and the Nassau Electric Railroad Company. From the final decree, plaintiff appeals, and defendants also appeal. The bill herein was filed July 14, 1911, and this case was before us in 209 Fed. 229, 126 C. C. A. 297, on appeal from an interlocutory decree.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of New York. Bill by the Cheatham Electric Switching Device Company against the Transit Development Company and the Nassau Electric Railroad Company. From the final decree, plaintiff appeals, and defendants also appeal. The bill herein was filed July 14, 1911, and this case was before us in 209 Fed. 229, 126 C. C. A. 297, on appeal from an interlocutory decree. The accounting mentioned on this previous appeal having proceeded, the master reported, and the court allowed certain damages; but the master’s finding that…
1Opinion of the Court
HOUGH, Circuit Judge.
Pursuit by plaintiff of these defendants began with an action at law, in which summons was served on or about January 4, 1911. That action was tried before a jury, and resulted in a verdict, which found in effect that defendants, or one of them, had infringed plaintiff’s patent by using eight electric railway switches, as to each one of which the jury awarded plaintiff $68.93.
A writ of error was taken to this judgment, and we reviewed the case in 194 Fed. 963, 114 C. C. A. 599. This bill in equity was brought to recover such damages and profits as plaintiff might be…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Cromwell v. County of SacSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Ecaubert v. AppletonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1895
- Transit Development Co. v. Cheatham Electric Switching Device Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1912
- Cheatham Electric Switching Device Co. v. Transit Development Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1913
- Cheatham Electric Switching Device Co. v. Brooklyn Rapid Transit Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1916
3Cited by20 opinions
- Henkel v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Ry. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Kaufman v. EdelsteinCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1976
- Edwin Green, Jr., as Administrator of the Estate of Edwin Green, Deceased, and Mary Green v. American Tobacco CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1962
- Specialty Equipment & MacHinery Corp. v. Zell Motor Car Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1952
- Gotz v. Universal Products Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1943
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.