William Cramp & Sons Ship & Engine Building Co. v. International Curtis Marine Turbine Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. The case is stated in the opinion, Crozier v. Krupp, 224 U. S. 290, was not decided upon the basis of Crozier being an officer upon salary who derived no pecuniary benefit from the infringement, but ‘ with the understanding that that fact became immaterial when Congress passed the Act of June 25, 1910. The transaction was treated as in effect a licensed one; hence there could be ho injunction.
Read the full summary
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. The case is stated in the opinion, Crozier v. Krupp, 224 U. S. 290, was not decided upon the basis of Crozier being an officer upon salary who derived no pecuniary benefit from the infringement, but ‘ with the understanding that that fact became immaterial when Congress passed the Act of June 25, 1910. The transaction was treated as in effect a licensed one; hence there could be ho injunction. The court held, by implication, that there can be no accounting in such a case, for the only theory upon which accounting can be ordered…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice White
The history of this suit from its commencement up to the development of the controversy now before us, will be shown by an examination of the decided cases referred to in the margin. 1 We shall therefore not recur to-that which has gone before but confine our statement to the things essential to an understanding of the phase of the issué which we must now decide.
Under proposals submitted by the Navy Department the petitioner, the Cramp Company, in 1908 contracted to build two torpedo boat destroyers, Nos. 30 and 31, and in 1911 further'contracted to build four such boats, Nos. 47, 48,49 and…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Schillinger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Belknap v. SchildSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Crozier v. Fried. Krupp AktiengesellschaftSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- United States v. Berdan Fire-Arms Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1895
- United States v. PalmerSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by61 opinions
- Yearsley v. W. A. Ross Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Richmond Screw Anchor Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
- United States v. Dubilier Condenser CorpSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Hartford-Empire Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- United States v. North American Transportation & Trading Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1920
56 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.