Legal Opinion

Rodman Chemical Co. v. E. F. Houghton Co.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided May 18, 1916PublishedCited by 10 opinions

In Equity. Bill by the Rodman Chemical Company against E. E. Houghton Company. Sur defendant’s objections to plaintiff’s interrogatories and plaintiff’s motion to enforce answers objected to as evasive. Defendant required to answer interrogatories as indicated.

Read the full summary

In Equity. Bill by the Rodman Chemical Company against E. E. Houghton Company. Sur defendant’s objections to plaintiff’s interrogatories and plaintiff’s motion to enforce answers objected to as evasive. Defendant required to answer interrogatories as indicated. In the suit which was for infringement of a patent, the bill also alleged that defendant by means of printed publications denied the validity of the patents and encouraged others to infringe; wherefore an injunction was prayed.

1Opinion of the Court

DICKINSON, District Judge.

Interrogatories were filed by plaintiff under equity rule 58 (198 Fed. xxxiv, 115 C. C. A. xxxiv). They number 21. Answers have been filed to those numbered consecutively 1 to 12, both inclusive, and the remaining ones are left unanswered, pending disposition of objections made to them.

[1] We will take up, first, defendant’s objections. The general purpose of rule 58 is to expedite the decision of causes by eliminating the necessity for inquiry into the uncontroverted features of what is included in the issues as made up of record. The rule embraces all material…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Luten v. CampDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1915
  2. Blast Furnace Appliances Co. v. Worth Bros.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1915

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Universal Oil Products Co. v. Skelly Oil Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1926
  2. Batdorf v. Sattley Coin Handling Mach. Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1916
  3. Marquette Mfg. Co. v. Oglesby Coal Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1918
  4. Teller v. Montgomery Ward & Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1939
  5. Goodrich Zinc Corporation v. CarlinDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1925

5 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