Legal Opinion

Hubbard v. Allen

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 7, 1889No. 71PublishedCited by 2 opinions

ERROR TO THE COURT OE COMMON PLEAS NO. 2 OE ALLEGHENY COUNTY. No. 71 October Term 1888, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 645 July Term 1887, C. P. No. 2. To tbe first Monday of July, 1887, a summons in assumpsit was issued in an action by L. M. Allen, administrator d. b. n. of -George Palmer, deceased, against Charles W. Hubbard, D. M. Long, Charles Lockhart and Thomas Bakewell, surviving partners of the firm of Hubbard, Lippincott, Bakewell & Co., to recover royalties accruing…

Read the full summary

ERROR TO THE COURT OE COMMON PLEAS NO. 2 OE ALLEGHENY COUNTY. No. 71 October Term 1888, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 645 July Term 1887, C. P. No. 2. To tbe first Monday of July, 1887, a summons in assumpsit was issued in an action by L. M. Allen, administrator d. b. n. of -George Palmer, deceased, against Charles W. Hubbard, D. M. Long, Charles Lockhart and Thomas Bakewell, surviving partners of the firm of Hubbard, Lippincott, Bakewell & Co., to recover royalties accruing under an agreement relating to the assignment of a patented improvement in the methods of manufacturing axes. Issue. At…

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION,

Mr. Justice Sterrett :

This suit, against the survivors of Hubbard, Lippincott, Bakewell '& Co., was brought to recover royalties alleged to have accrued under their agreement with George Palmer of September 2, 1871. The origin and substance of that agreement are as follows: On August 22, 1871, letters patent of the United States were issued to Charles W. Hubbard, of the firm defendants below, and George Palmer, plaintiff’s intestate, “ for a new and useful improvement in the manufacture of axes.” On September 2d following, the patentees assigned their interest in the patent to the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. James G. Wilson v. George A. Sanford and Robert G. MusgroveSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
  2. Hartell v. TilghmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
  3. Albright v. TeasSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
  4. Dale Tile Manufacturing Co. v. HyattSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  5. Slemmer's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Kroegher v. McConway & Torley Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
  2. Thys v. RivardWashington Supreme Court · 1946

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

Powered by the Exa API