Legal Opinion

Whitall-Tatum v. Corning Glass Works

District Court, W.D. New York

Decided May 21, 1935No. 1879PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

KNIGHT, District Judge.

The suit is for patent infringement. Issue was joined by an answer denying infringement and the validity of the patent. The answer asks no affirmative relief and sets up no counterclaim. Interrogatories and answers were filed by both parties. No further proceedings were had until plaintiff filed notice of motion to dismiss without prejudice, on payment of costs. Thereafter defendant filed notice of motion to take testimony abroad and also de bene esse. Both motions are now before this court for decision.

The law is well settled that a plaintiff has the absolute right to…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Pullman's Palace Car Co. v. Central Transportation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1898
  2. Ex Parte Skinner & Eddy Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
  3. United Motors Service, Inc. v. Tropic-Aire, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1932
  4. City of Milwaukee v. Activated Sludge, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1934
  5. Allington v. Shevlin-Hixon Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1924

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Leach v. Ross Heater & Mfg. Co.District Court, W.D. New York · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API