Curriden v. Middleton
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEAL PROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Holmes
This is a bill in equity against the defendant Middleton and two others not served, to which Middleton demurred. The demurrer was sustained and the bill dismissed by the Supreme Court of the District and the decree was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. 37 App. D. C. 568. The allegations in brief are that Middleton was a patent lawyer and personal Mend of the plaintiff, that he brought to the plaintiff’s attention a patent fluid and apparatus representing them to be valuable, with details of fact confirming the statement, and representing that Middleton was acting as agent of the patentees;…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Buzard v. HoustonSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- United States v. Bitter Root Development Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1906
3Cited by39 opinions
- Ross v. BernhardSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Schank v. . SchuchmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1914
- Twist v. Prairie Oil & Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Ilc Peripherals Leasing Corp. v. International Business MacHines Corp.District Court, N.D. California · 1978
- Haynes Trane Service Agency, Inc. v. American Standard, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2009
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.