Legal Opinion
Crown Die & Tool Co. v. Nye Tool & MacHine Works
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided February 19, 1923No. 240PublishedCited by 253 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Taft
The petitioner raises a question of jurisdiction. It says that the suit does not arise under the patent laws of the United States, but is merely a suit on a contract like one for royalties under a license of which the District Court could not have jurisdiction because the parties are both citizens of the same State. To sustain this argument are cited Albright v. Teas, 106 U. S. 613; Pratt v. Paris Gas Light Co., 168 U. S. 255, and Excelsior Wooden Pipe Co. v. Pacific Bridge Co., 185 U. S. 282. The cases have no • application and the point is without merit. The bill in this case is based on an…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Waterman v. MacKenzieSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Continental Paper Bag Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Gayler v. WilderSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
- Bement v. National Harrow Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Pratt v. Paris Gas Light & Coke Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1897
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by253 opinions
- Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Rite-Hite Corp. v. Kelley Co.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- United States v. General Electric Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Independent Wireless Telegraph Co. v. Radio Corp. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Commil United States, LLC v. Cisco Sys., Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2015
248 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.