Lowell Mfg. Co. v. Whittall

First Circuit

Lowell Mfg. Co. v. Whittall

84 F. 1019, 28 C.C.A. 653, 1898 U.S. App. LEXIS 1996

CourtCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit

DecidedFebruary 18, 1898

DocketNo. 219

StatusPublished

This text of 84 F. 1019 (Lowell Mfg. Co. v. Whittall) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lowell Mfg. Co. v. Whittall, 84 F. 1019, 28 C.C.A. 653, 1898 U.S. App. LEXIS 1996 (1st Cir. 1898).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

An examination of this case leads us to the same conclusion as that reached by the court below (79 Fed. 787), and we do not feel called upon to add anything to the reasoning of that court in explanation of its decision. The grounds of the decision are fully set out in a carefully drawn opinion, and sustain the result reached. The fact that the Lowell Company’s artist or designer, when creating the infringing design, had before him a pattern embodying the complainant’s patented design, and that his work resulted in so close an imitation, is upon the most charitable view strongly suggestive of the idea that the purpose was to appropriate the attractive features and effect of the complainant’s pattern. The decree of the circuit court is affirmed, with costs of this court to the appellee.

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

PER CURIAM.

An examination of this case leads us to the same conclusion as that reached by the court below (79 Fed. 787), and we do not feel called upon to add anything to the reasoning of that court in explanation of its decision. The grounds of the decision are fully set out in a carefully drawn opinion, and sustain the result reached. The fact that the Lowell Company’s artist or designer, when creating the infringing design, had before him a pattern embodying the complainant’s patented design, and that his work resulted in so close an imitation, is upon the most charitable view strongly suggestive of the idea that the purpose was to appropriate the attractive features and effect of the complainant’s pattern. The decree of the circuit court is affirmed, with costs of this court to the appellee.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 F. 1019, 28 C.C.A. 653, 1898 U.S. App. LEXIS 1996, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lowell-mfg-co-v-whittall-ca1-1898.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack