Legal Opinion

Walker v. Lakewood Engineering Co.

District Court, E.D. Michigan

Decided August 10, 1926No. 787PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

TUTTLE, District Judge.

The Walker patent, No. 1,234,984, in suit, has to do with the final operation in concrete road building. The patent has nothing to do with the machines used, or the methods used, in preparing the concrete for the road, has nothing to do with dumping the concrete in its position along the roadway, and has nothing to do, speaking in a large and general way, with shaping the particular form of the surface of the concrete. That is all done prior to the use of this patented device.. With the old manner of mixing concrete, dumping it in the road, leveling off, and then…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Topliff v. TopliffSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  2. Hobbs v. BeachSupreme Court of the United States · 1901
  3. Penfield v. Chambers Bros. Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1899
  4. Murray v. Detroit Wire Spring Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1913
  5. King Ax Co. v. HubbardCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1899

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Auditorium Conditioning Corp. v. St. George Holding Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API