Legal Opinion

Crystal Percolator Co. v. Landers, Frary & Clark

District Court, D. Connecticut

Decided May 15, 1919No. Nos. 1477, 1478PublishedCited by 3 opinions

In Equity. Bills by the Crystal Percolator Company, Incorporated, against Panders, Erary & Clark, which were consolidated.

1Opinion of the Court

THOMAS, District Judge.

[ 1 ] The plaintiff, by assignment, is the owner of a mechanical patent for percolator supports, No. 1,180,881, issued on the 25th of April, 1916, to Fiore Ricciardelli, and a design patent. No. 47,545, for a percolator, issued on July 6, 1915, to F. Ricciardelli and J. B. Bleichrode. Separate suits were brought on each patent. They were tried together and will be decided together. Under equity rule 26 (201 Fed. v, 118 C. C. A. v), as Judge Dickinson says in Eclipse Machine Co. et al. v. Harley-Davidson Motor Co. (D. C.) 244 Fed. 463:

"A plaintiff may now join (upon…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Continental Paper Bag Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1908
  2. McClain v. OrtmayerSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
  3. Motion Picture Patents Co. v. Universal Film Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1917
  4. Reckendorfer v. FaberSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
  5. Hailes v. Van WormerSupreme Court of the United States · 1874

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Empire Fuel Co. v. HaysDistrict Court, N.D. West Virginia · 1924
  2. H. D. Smith & Co. v. Peck, Stow & Wilcox Co.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1919
  3. In re VincentCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API