Legal Opinion

Gustin v. Record Pub. Co.

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania

Decided January 27, 1904No. 44PublishedCited by 1 opinion

At Taw. On motion for new trial.

1Opinion of the Court

J. B. McPHERSON, District Judge.

This case presents the same question that was decided in Rinehart v. Smith (C. C.) 121 Fed. 148, namely, whether the 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 by the subsequent legislation relating to copyright. The reasons there referred to, which moved the court to answer the question in the negative, are expressed more at length in Falk v. Curtis Pub. Co., 102 Fed., on page 970, reported on appeal…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Strong, Deemer & Co. v. DinninySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
  2. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co. v. EllseySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1877
  3. Falk v. Curtis Pub. Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1901
  4. Rinehart v. SmithU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania · 1903

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Hills & Co. v. HooverU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania · 1906

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

Powered by the Exa API