Automatic Pencil Sharpener Co. v. Boston Pencil Pointer Co.
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the District of Massachusetts; James M. Morton, Judge. Action at law by the Automatic Pencil Sharpener Company against the Boston Pencil Pointer Company. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the Court
ANDERSON, Circuit Judge.
This is an action at law to recover damages for the alleged infringement of Webster’s patent, No. 640,846, djited January 9, 19Ó0, for a pencil sharpener.
[1] After a long trial before a jury, the court below ruled that as matter of law the plaintiff was not entitled to recover. The verdict was returned in the form of an alternative verdict; the jury finding, subject to the court’s ruling on the question of law, for the plaintiff in the sum of $16,670, but consenting to a verdict for the defendant if the court should rule that as matter of law the plaintiff was not…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Coupe v. RoyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Singer Manufacturing Co. v. CramerSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Market Street Cable Railway Co. v. RowleySupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Bischoff v. WetheredSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
- Bothwell v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Northern Railway Co. v. PageSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Limbershaft Sales Corp. v. A. G. Spalding & Bros.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1940
- Mills Woven Cartridge Belt Co. v. MalleyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1923
- United States v. HallCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1936
- B. A. Carroll Stevedore Co. v. MakindaCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1927
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.