Rinehart v. Smith

J. B. McPHERSON, District Judge.

For reasons given in Falk v. Curtis Pub. Co. (C. C.) 102 Fed. 967, I do not think that the common-law action of replevin, as it is practiced in the state of Pennsylvania, is an appropriate remedy to enforce the forfeiture provided by section 4965 of the Revised Statutes [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3414], and the supplementary legislation relating to copyright. This is such an action, in which the defendant has given a claim-property bond, and retained the offending articles; and these have thereby become, according to the Pennsylvania law, his indefeasible…