Birdsall v. American Sales Book Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Birdsall v. American Sales Book Co.

202 A.D. 733

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 15, 1922

StatusPublished

This text of 202 A.D. 733 (Birdsall v. American Sales Book Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Birdsall v. American Sales Book Co., 202 A.D. 733 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

Order modified by granting defendant’s motion so as to strike out paragraph XII of the amended complaint as irrelevant and prejudicial, and as so modified affirmed, without costs. We think this paragraph attempts to state a cause of action for infringement of patent, of which the Federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction. (Continental Store Service Co. v. Clark, 100 N. Y. 365; Comerma Co. v. Comerma, 182 App. Div. 576.) Blackmar, P. J., Rich, Kelly, Jaycox and Young, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order modified by granting defendant’s motion so as to strike out paragraph XII of the amended complaint as irrelevant and prejudicial, and as so modified affirmed, without costs. We think this paragraph attempts to state a cause of action for infringement of patent, of which the Federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction. (Continental Store Service Co. v. Clark, 100 N. Y. 365; Comerma Co. v. Comerma, 182 App. Div. 576.) Blackmar, P. J., Rich, Kelly, Jaycox and Young, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

202 A.D. 733, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/birdsall-v-american-sales-book-co-nyappdiv-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack