Hicks v. Otto

17 F. 539, 1883 U.S. App. LEXIS 2298
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York·Decided July 25, 1883·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Wheeler, J.

The motion of defendants, now heard, for an amendment of the answer, and a commission to take the testimony of Den-ton, in London, to show that he, and not Peroni, is the original inventor of improvements in thermometers, patented to the orator as assignee of Peroni, must he denied. While such motions are granted with liberality, some prospect is required that there is evidence to support the amendment which can be had. Here, the affidavit of Denton, filed by the orator in opposition to the motion, stating that he does not claim to be and is not, and that Peroni is, the original inventor, and his refusal to make an affidavit for the defendants to the contrary, on their application, show that there is no such prospect. Motion denied.

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

Hicks v. Otto, 17 F. 539, 1883 U.S. App. LEXIS 2298 (circtsdny 1883).

17 F. 539 (Hicks v. Otto) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ritchie v. McMullen
79 F. 522 (Sixth Circuit, 1897)