Legal Opinion

Central Shade Roller Co. v. Cushman

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 10, 1887PublishedCited by 25 opinions

Bill in equity, filed January 29,1884, alleging the following facts: Before April 18, 1883, the defendant, Charles W. Bassett, and the Meriden Curtain Fixture Company “ were each engaged in the business of making and selling a certain sort of curtain fixture known as ‘wood balance shade rollers,’” which were “ manufactured under several letters patent owned by the said three parties respectively; ” and “ said three parties did a very large business in said rollers, and were…

Read the full summary

Bill in equity, filed January 29,1884, alleging the following facts: Before April 18, 1883, the defendant, Charles W. Bassett, and the Meriden Curtain Fixture Company “ were each engaged in the business of making and selling a certain sort of curtain fixture known as ‘wood balance shade rollers,’” which were “ manufactured under several letters patent owned by the said three parties respectively; ” and “ said three parties did a very large business in said rollers, and were in fact the principal dealers therein, and substantially supplied the market with such rollers,” though there were “…

1Opinion of the CourtW. Allen, J.

-The contract which is sought to be enforced by this bill, and the validity of which is the only question presented by the demurrer and argued by the parties, was made between the plaintiff, of the first part, and three manufacturers, under several patents of certain curtain fixtures, known as “ wood balance shade rollers,” of the second part, in pursuance of an arrangement between the persons forming the party of the second part, that the plaintiff corporation should be created for the purpose of becoming a party to the contract with them. *363The general purpose of the combination was to…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Craft v. McConoughyIllinois Supreme Court · 1875

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. United States v. Trenton Potteries Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1927
  2. United States v. Addyston Pipe & Steel Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1898
  3. Commonwealth v. DyerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922
  4. State ex inf. Hadley v. Standard Oil Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1909
  5. Commonwealth v. McHughMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1950

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

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

Powered by the Exa API