Page Mach. Co. v. Dow
District Court, S.D. New York
In Equity. Suit by the Page Machine Company against Dow, Jones & Co. On exceptions to report of master.
1Opinion of the Court
LEARNED HAND, District Judge.
[1] I think that there is no gain in repeating the general outlines of this litigation, which sufficiently appear in the master’s report. The most orderly way to approach the accounting is to take up the several phases of the defendant’s telegraphs, with a view to seeing just which of the claims have been violated at the different periods. The total period between January 24, 1905, for patent 780,664, and April 4, 1905, for patent 786,294, until that machine appeared in 1912, which avoided the patent altogether, may itself be divided into three subperiods, during…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co. v. Wagner Electric & Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Crosby Steam Gage & Valve Co. v. Consolidated Safety Valve Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
- McCreary v. Pennsylvania Canal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Columbia Wire Co. v. Kokomo Steel & Wire Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1911
- Page Mach. Co. v. DowU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1908
3Cited by6 opinions
- Duplate Corp. v. Triplex Safety Glass Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Dunkley Co. v. Central California CanneriesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1925
- Sheldon v. Metro-Goldwyn Pictures CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1938
- Wolfe v. National Lead CompanyDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1957
- American Can Co. v. Goldee Mfg. Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1927
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.