Potts v. Creager
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO. This was a bill in equity by C. & A. Potts & Co., an Indiana corporation, against the firm of Jonathan .Qreager’s Sons, of Cincinnati, for the infringement of patent No. 322,393, issued July 14, 1885, to Clayton Potts and Albert Potts for a clay disintegrator; and also of patent No. 368,898, issued August 23, 1887, to the same inventors for an improvement upon the prior patent.
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO. This was a bill in equity by C. & A. Potts & Co., an Indiana corporation, against the firm of Jonathan .Qreager’s Sons, of Cincinnati, for the infringement of patent No. 322,393, issued July 14, 1885, to Clayton Potts and Albert Potts for a clay disintegrator; and also of patent No. 368,898, issued August 23, 1887, to the same inventors for an improvement upon the prior patent. A third patent to George Potts, No. 384,278, was originally included in the bill, but by stipulation between the parties all…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Brown
Beds of clay are composed of different strata; and the first step necessary to be taken,in the manufáóture of such clay is a thorough mixing of the strata, and the reduction of the clay to a suitable condition. Otherwise, the product will contain laminations, will shrink unevenly and check in burning, scale or peel off in use, and be less valuable than products made of clays which are first thoroughly mixed and tempered, and reduced to a homogeneous mass before being manufactured into the product. Prior to the Potts inventions various methods seem to have been employed to secure this result.…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Loom Co. v. HigginsSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Atlantic Works v. BradySupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Hotchkiss v. GreenwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
- Brown v. PiperSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Smith v. Goodyear Dental Vulcanite Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1877
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by324 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Mast, Foos & Co. v. Stover Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Ray-O-Vac Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- National Hollow Brake-Beam Co. v. Interchangeable Brake-Beam Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1901
- Hobbs v. BeachSupreme Court of the United States · 1901
319 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.