Laas v. Scott
District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
In Equity. On final hearing. This is a bill in equity in the usual form for the infringement of letters patent 757,754, issued to complainants April 19, 190-4. Prayer for an injunction and accounting. The device covered by this patent is known as a rail anchor or anti-creeper, designed to prevent the creeping or longitudinal movement of the rails of a railroad track.
Read the full summary
In Equity. On final hearing. This is a bill in equity in the usual form for the infringement of letters patent 757,754, issued to complainants April 19, 190-4. Prayer for an injunction and accounting. The device covered by this patent is known as a rail anchor or anti-creeper, designed to prevent the creeping or longitudinal movement of the rails of a railroad track. To- this bill an answer was interposed ■denying infringement, setting up the claim that defendant John M. Scott was the original and true inventor and entitled to a- patent therefor. Defendants also filed a cross-bill, under…
1Opinion of the Court
QUARLES, District Judge.
The attention of the court has been called to an agreement entered into by the several parties pendente lite, calculated to bring about a modus vivendi for the purpose of facilitating sales of rail stays under the several patents: At first blush, it seemed doubtful whether jurisdiction of the court would survive this adjustment; but a.careful inspection of the stipulation convinces me that the issues under the cross-bill have not been compromised, but such controversy remains unaffected, except that all parties agree that the decision of this court shall be accepted as…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Morgan v. DanielsSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Coffin v. OgdenSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Butterworth v. United States Ex Rel. HoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Agawam Co. v. JordanSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Gandy v. MarbleSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Standard Oil Company v. MontedisonDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1980
- Stead Lens Co. v. Kryptok Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1914
- Curtiss Aeroplane & Motor Corp. v. JaninCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1921
- Harper v. ZimmermannDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1930
- Kryptok Co. v. Stead Lens Co.District Court, W.D. Missouri · 1913
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.