Hawley v. Bagley
This text of 11 F. Cas. 882 (Hawley v. Bagley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Patents — Date Necessary on Pa,tente» Articles.
1. * It is necessary that each article should be stamped with the day of the month as well as the year, but if this is done it is sufficient, even if the word “patented” is abbreviated..
2. To entitle the plaintiff to recover, he must allege and prove facts showing that he has a title to recover, and the proof must correspond with the allegations. Where the declaration charged the defendant with having sold an “extension pen-holder,” while the proof showed the patent to be for an “improvement in pens and pencil cases.” Held, that the plaintiff could not recover.
3. In an action aui tarn, under section 6 of the act of 1842 [5 Stat. 544], for a penalty, the proof must correspond with the allegations of the declaration. Where the declaration charged the defendant with having sold an “extension pen-holder” without stamping • on it the date of the patent, while the proof showed the patent to be for an “improvement in pens and pencil cases.” Held, that the plaintiff could not recover.
[Cited in Law. Dig. 584, 588, and 675, to the points as stated above. Nowhere more fully reported; opinion not now accessible.]
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
11 F. Cas. 882, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hawley-v-bagley-circtedpa-1822.