Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

Birdie (The)..

238

(In re)... 159, 165, 168, 262

Bliss v. Gaylord Manufacturing Co. 279 Elizabeth English (The)......... 180

E

v. Haight..

7

Bonesteel (In re)...

175

(Voorhies v.)..

[blocks in formation]

Bordentown (The).

374

Bowen v. Chase..

Braunsdorf (Potter v.).

[blocks in formation]

(Singer v.).

521 Fibre Disintegrating Co. (Atkins v.)

Bridgeport (The)..

361

555

C

Flint v. Norwich & New York
Transportation Co.....

Fullerton (United States v.)...... 177

536

[blocks in formation]

......

Gladstone v. Chamberlain... 207 | Mullee (In re)......
Gorham Mfg. Co. v. White..

23

513 Mynderse (United States v.)...... 483

[blocks in formation]

Loon (The).

244 Scotia (The)...

Lovejoy (Shaw & Wilcox Co. v.).. 232 Shaw & Wilcox Co. v. Lovejoy... 232

Sargent (Rogers v. )..
Sawyer v. Oakman.

507

290

......

308

....

Sibley (Dibble v.)..
Singer v. Braunsdorf.

209

521

M

Smith v. Averill..

29

[blocks in formation]
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

CASES

ARGUED AND DETERMINED

IN THE

CIRCUIT COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES

WITHIN THE SECOND CIRCUIT.

ROBERT T. LIDDLE

vs.

UZAL CORY AND WILLIAM D. CORY. IN EQUITY.

Where an injunction, restraining the infringement of a patent, was issued on a final decree in a suit in equity, and a motion was afterwards made for an attachment against the defendant, for violating the injunction by selling an article alleged to be an infringement of the patent, and it appeared that no such article had been sold by the defendant prior to the making of the decree, and it did not appear that such an article existed before the making of the decree, and an issue was fairly raised, on the facts, as to whether such article was an infringement of the patent: Held, that such issue could not be disposed of on a motion, on affidavits, but must be determined in a suit brought for the purpose.

Held, also, that the case was not a proper one in which to direct proofs to be taken before a Master.

(Before BENEDICT, J., Southern District of New York, October 16th, 1865.)

THIS was a motion for an attachment against the defendants for violating an injunction issued upon a final decree, in a suit brought for the infringement of letters patent, granted to the plaintiff, for an improvement in air-heating furnaces. After the issuing of the injunction, the defendants. sold and caused to be erected, a furnace, which they called

VOL. VII.-1

« ZurückWeiter »