Legal Opinion

Seagren v. Smith

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 10, 1944No. Civ. 14341PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtYork, P. J.

—This appeal which is presented on the judgment roll alone is from that portion of a judgment rendered in an action by a patentee for an accounting and injunction against his licensee by which the trial court determined that it was without jurisdiction to grant any relief from and after the date of a notice given to him by the defendant cancelling the license.

Prom a recitation in appellant’s opening brief outlining the factual background of the instant litigation—which is not disputed by respondent—it appears that appellant is the inventor of a multiple gear rotary pump used in pumping…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Luckett v. Delpark, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  2. James G. Wilson v. George A. Sanford and Robert G. MusgroveSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
  3. In Re Norcor Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1940
  4. Pendleton v. FergusonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
  5. in re Michigan Motor Specialties Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1923

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Lear Siegler, Inc., a Corporation v. John S. AdkinsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1964
  2. H. J. Heinz Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
  3. Hartley Pen Co. v. Lindy Pen Co.District Court, S.D. California · 1954
  4. Adkins v. Lear, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1967
  5. In Re Oximetrix, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API