Legal Opinion

Wolff Truck Frame Co. v. American Steel Foundries

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Decided January 2, 1912No. 1,828PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Illinois. Suit in equity by the American Steel Foundries and the J. S. An-drews Company against the Wolff Truck Frame Company. Decree for complainants, and defendant appeals. The case is thus stated by the trial judge: “The bill charges infringement of claims 2, 3, and 6, of patent No. 569,044, granted to J. S. Hardie on October 6, 1896, for a metallic car truck.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Illinois. Suit in equity by the American Steel Foundries and the J. S. An-drews Company against the Wolff Truck Frame Company. Decree for complainants, and defendant appeals. The case is thus stated by the trial judge: “The bill charges infringement of claims 2, 3, and 6, of patent No. 569,044, granted to J. S. Hardie on October 6, 1896, for a metallic car truck. The claims in suit read as follows, viz.: “2. A car truck, comprising two truck-arches rigidly connected with each other, each…

1Opinion of the CourtSanborn, District Judge

(after stating the facts as above). [1] The gist of the testimony so taken under objection is that Hardie’s real invention was a truck adapted for use with any bolster then known, and particularly suited to that of the type of the Schaffer bolster, having column guides, but which cannot be inserted into the side-frames unless the opening is enlarged in the manner shown in the patent drawings. But as the purpose of this enlargement is not explained in the patent or file wrapper, and since the bolster shown in the patent needs no such enlargement (working just as well with a square opening), a…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Bates v. CoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  2. Merrill v. YeomansSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  3. The Incandescent Lamp PatentSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
  4. Blease v. GarlingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
  5. Nelson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1906

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. University City, Mo. v. Home Fire & Marine Ins. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1940
  2. Simpson v. Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1920
  3. Eclipse MacH. Co. v. J. H. Specialty Mfg. Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1933
  4. American Steel Foundries v. Scullin-Gallagher Iron & Steel Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1912
  5. Leonhardt v. LynchDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1912

3 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