Gilman & Son, Inc. v. Turner Tanning Machinery Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract, by one corporation against another, to recover royalties or license fees on twenty-eight hide-working machines. Writ dated July 9, 1915. In the Superior Court the case was tried before J. F. Brown, J. The evidence and the plaintiff’s offer of proof are described in the opinion. The judge excluded the evidence offered by the plaintiff and, on motion of the defendant, ordered a verdict for the defendant.
Read the full summary
Contract, by one corporation against another, to recover royalties or license fees on twenty-eight hide-working machines. Writ dated July 9, 1915. In the Superior Court the case was tried before J. F. Brown, J. The evidence and the plaintiff’s offer of proof are described in the opinion. The judge excluded the evidence offered by the plaintiff and, on motion of the defendant, ordered a verdict for the defendant. With the consent of the parties the judge reported the case for determination by this court. If there was no error in the rulings of the judge, judgment was to be entered on the…
1Opinion of the CourtCrosby, J.
This is an action to recover royalties or license fees on twenty-eight hide-working machines. Under a written agreement dated January 10, 1.912, the plaintiff (which had previously acquired the right to do so from the owner of the patent) licensed the defendant to manufacture and sell the machines until December 12, 1928, unless the agreement should be earlier terminated in accordance with its provisions. The agreement provided that the defendant should render to the plaintiff quarterly returns showing the number of machines manufactured and sold by it, and on the first day of the month…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Bartlett v. StanchfieldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1889
- Beach & Clarridge Co. v. American Steam Gauge & Valve Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- Ellis v. BlockMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
- Goodhue v. Hartford Fire InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
- Metropolitan Coal Co. v. Boutell Transportation & Towing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
3Cited by8 opinions
- Siegel v. KnottMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944
- Roxbury Painting & Decorating Co. v. NuteMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1919
- United Shoe Workers of America v. Le Danne FootwearDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1949
- Clifford Shoe Co. v. United Shoe Machinery Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
- James Elgar, Inc. v. NewhallMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.