George v. Victor Talking MacHine Co.

293 U.S. 377, 55 S. Ct. 229, 79 L. Ed. 439, 1934 U.S. LEXIS 32
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided December 17, 1934·No. 128·Published·Cited by 33 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Review was limited to the question of the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court of Appeals. The suit was brought for the infringement of the common law right of property in a song, and the bill sought an accounting of profits made by the defendant. The District Court sustained the plaintiff's right as author and found infringement. Decree was entered granting an injunction and appointing a special master to take and state an account of profits and to report to the court, with the usual provisions for exceptions to the report. The decree was interlocutory. The Palmyra, 10 Wheat. 502; Perkins v. Fowrniquet, 6 How. 206, 208, 209; Craighead v. Wilson, 18 How. 199, 202 (explaining Forgay v. Conrad, 6 How. 201); Beebe v. Russell, 19 How. 283, 287; Humiston v. Stainthorp, 2 *379 Wall. 106; Keystone Manganese Co. v. Martin, 132 U. S. 91, 93, 97; McGourkey v. Toledo & Ohio Central Ry. Co., 146 U. S. 536, 547; Guarantee Co. v. Mechanics’ Savings Bank & Trust Co., 173 U. S. 582, 586; Simmons Co. v. Grier Brothers Co., 258 U. S. 82, 89. The decree was entered on March 31, 1933, and the appeal to the Circuit Court of Appeals was not taken until May 18, 1933. The Circuit Court of Appeals entertained the appeal and reversed the decree of the District Court. As the appeal was not taken within the time prescribed by law, the Circuit Court of Appeals was without jurisdiction. Jud. Code, § 129, 28 U. S. C. 227. The decree of the Circuit Court of Appeals is reversed and the cause is remanded to that court with directions to dismiss the appeal.

Reversed.

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

George v. Victor Talking MacHine Co., 293 U.S. 377, 55 S. Ct. 229, 79 L. Ed. 439, 1934 U.S. LEXIS 32 (1934).

293 U.S. 377 (George v. Victor Talking MacHine Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wilkins v. Menchaca (In Re Wilkins)
587 B.R. 97 (Ninth Circuit, 2018)
Gonzalez v. Thaler
132 S. Ct. 641 (Supreme Court, 2012)
Magda Marin Piazza v. Awilda Aponte Roque
909 F.2d 35 (First Circuit, 1990)
Browder v. Director, Dept. of Corrections of Ill.
434 U.S. 257 (Supreme Court, 1978)
Baltimore Contractors, Inc. v. Bodinger
348 U.S. 176 (Supreme Court, 1955)
United States v. Scarlata Appeal of Di Pippa
214 F.2d 807 (Third Circuit, 1954)
Hillside Transit Co. v. Larson
62 N.W.2d 722 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1954)
Waddell v. Chicago Land Clearance Commission
206 F.2d 748 (Seventh Circuit, 1953)
United States v. Kovich
201 F.2d 470 (Seventh Circuit, 1953)
McDonald v. Kershaw, Butler, Engineers, Ltd.
172 F.2d 798 (Fifth Circuit, 1949)
Miles v. Matthews
166 F.2d 1020 (Fifth Circuit, 1948)
Larsen v. Wright & Cobb Lighterage Co.
167 F.2d 320 (Second Circuit, 1948)
Wolfinger v. Mueller
165 F.2d 844 (Sixth Circuit, 1948)
Nachtman v. Crucible Steel Co. of America
165 F.2d 997 (Third Circuit, 1948)