Crooks v. Aeolian Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Crooks v. Aeolian Co.

181 A.D. 898

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

DecidedNovember 15, 1917

StatusPublished

This text of 181 A.D. 898 (Crooks v. Aeolian 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

Crooks v. Aeolian Co., 181 A.D. 898 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. We think there is evidence which authorized the referee to decide that on the 9th day of April, 1913, no competing manufacturer was then manufacturing an organ having the same musical effect as that produced by the invention covered by patents Nos. 671, 691. There is no evidence of either waiver or estoppel; and for that reason, while affirming the judgment, we reverse findings 27, 28, 29, 30, 33, 34 and 35. Present — Jenks, P. J., Stapleton, Mills, Putnam and Blackmar, JJ.

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

Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. We think there is evidence which authorized the referee to decide that on the 9th day of April, 1913, no competing manufacturer was then manufacturing an organ having the same musical effect as that produced by the invention covered by patents Nos. 671, 691. There is no evidence of either waiver or estoppel; and for that reason, while affirming the judgment, we reverse findings 27, 28, 29, 30, 33, 34 and 35. Present — Jenks, P. J., Stapleton, Mills, Putnam and Blackmar, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

181 A.D. 898, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crooks-v-aeolian-co-nyappdiv-1917.