United Shoe Machinery Co. v. Dean
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 38, March T., 1912, by defendant, from order of C. P. Lackawanna Co., May T., 1903, No. 432, dismissing exceptions to report of referee in case of United Shoe Machinery Company v. A. D. Dean. Exceptions to report of referee. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Error assigned was in dismissing exceptions to report of referee.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 38, March T., 1912, by defendant, from order of C. P. Lackawanna Co., May T., 1903, No. 432, dismissing exceptions to report of referee in case of United Shoe Machinery Company v. A. D. Dean. Exceptions to report of referee. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Error assigned was in dismissing exceptions to report of referee. The eases are numerous and unquestioned that hold that the owner of a patented article can sell it freed of the monopoly of the patent: Bloomer v. McQuewan, 55 TJ. S. 539. Purchasers of the exclusive privilege of making or vending the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Orlady, J.,
The plaintiff leased to one C. B. Hall, five patented machines to be used by him in the making and repairing of boots and shoes; among the conditions being “the leased machinery shall at all times remain and be the sole and exclusive property of the- lessor, and the lessee shall have no right of property therein but only the right to use the same upon the conditions therein contained. The leased machinery shall be used only by the lessee himself or by operatives in his direct employ and only in *90the factory occupied by him at Scranton, Pennsylvania. The leased machinery…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Morgan Envelope Co. v. Albany Perforated Wrapping Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Bloomer v. McQuewanSupreme Court of the United States · 1853
- Commonwealth v. Central D. & P. Tel. Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Dauphin County1891