Legal Opinion
National Hairdressers' & Cosmetologists' Ass'n v. Philad Co.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided November 15, 1941No. Civ. A. 155PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BIGGS, Circuit Judge.
The amended complaint at bar asserts two causes of action. The plaintiffs, the National Hairdressers’ and Cosmetologists' Association, Inc., and Fred The Hair Stylist, Inc., seek a declaratory judgment adjudging Josef Mayer’s Reissue Patent No. 18,841 to be invalid and a declaration that this patent is not infringed by Fred or the members of National. Fred and National seek also to enjoin the defendant from asserting that the members of National infringe the Mayer patent. Upon the alleged second cause of action the plaintiffs seek to enjoin the Philad Company from…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Railway Co. v. SaylesSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Crosley Corporation v. Hazeltine CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1941
- Leeds & Catlin Co. v. Victor Talking MacHine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
- Permutit Co. v. Graver Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Powers-Kennedy Contracting Corp. v. Concrete Mixing & Conveying Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1930
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Dewey & Almy Chemical Co. v. American Anode, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1943
- Zahn v. Transamerica CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1947
- Dickinson v. BurnhamCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1952
- Allen v. Radio Corporation of AmericaDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1942
- Hook v. Hook & Ackerman, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1954
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.