Legal Opinion
General Electric Co. v. Hygrade Sylvania Corporation
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided May 29, 1942PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LEIBELL, District Judge.
The United States of America moves for leave to intervene as a defendant in this patent suit in order to assert certain defenses set forth in a proposed answer annexed to the notice of motion, “on the ground that the patents alleged in the complaint to be infringed by articles manufactured, used and sold by the defendant Hygrade Sylvania Corporation, have been used illegally [by the plaintiff, General Electric Company] in violation of the Federal anti trust laws and in a manner contrary to public policy”. It is asserted that “these defenses to the plaintiff’s claim…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Virginian Railway Co. v. System Federation No. 40Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. United States Realty & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Morton Salt Co. v. G. S. Suppiger Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
- United States v. MorganSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- McMullen v. HoffmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Crosby Steam Gage & Valve Co. v. Manning, Maxwell & Moore, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1943
- Libbey-Owens-Ford Glass Co. v. Sylvania Industrial Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1946
- Leo Feist, Inc. v. YoungCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1943
- General Electric Co. v. Hygrade Sylvania CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1944
- Richards v. LevyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1972
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.