Legal Opinion
Marshall v. Colgate-Palmolive-Peet Co.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided June 2, 1949No. 9700PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KALODNER, Circuit Judge.
The ultimate question in this litigation is, who is the owner of the three inventions involved, 1 the employee-inventor or the employer? Since his former employer asserted claims of ownership against these inventions, and since these claims interfered with his business interests, the plaintiff brought this suit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 400, 2 to disperse the cloud upon his title; he also joined a claim for damages for alleged harmful conduct on the part of the defendant. The defendant filed a counterclaim praying that plaintiff be required to assign the inventions to…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- United States v. United States Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
- United States v. Dubilier Condenser CorpSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Solomons v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Dalzell v. Dueber Watch Case Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Standard Parts Co. v. PeckSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Cahill v. ReganNew York Court of Appeals · 1959
- Synthes, Inc. v. Emerge Medical, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2014
- Blum v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1950
- Lámar v. GrangerDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1951
- Alexis E. Ushakoff and Stanley A. Baron v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1964
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.