Parker v. Ferguson

18 F. Cas. 1126, 1 Blatchf. 407
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern New York·Decided June 15, 1849·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

On the trial béfore

NELSON, Circuit Justice,

the defendant set up the defence of a want of novelty in the invention, and to support it introduced a witness, Hosea W. Holmes, who swore that in 1819, in Stonington, Connecticut, he assisted in constructing a water wheel embracing the principle of the patentee’s invention; that it was constructed for a man who lived twelve miles distant from Stoning-ton, and was carried away by him to be put into a mill; and that the witness never saw it afterwards. _

In charging the jury, NELSON, Circuit Justice, remarked, that if the wheel spoken of by the witness, Holmes, was constructed before the plaintiff’s wheel, and was a perfect wheel, and was taken away to be used, the evidence, if believed, was sufficient to establish the fact of a want of novelty in the plaintiff’s wheel, although there was no evidence that the prior wheel was ever actually used.

The jury found a verdict for the defendant

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

Parker v. Ferguson, 18 F. Cas. 1126, 1 Blatchf. 407 (circtndny 1849).

18 F. Cas. 1126 (Parker v. Ferguson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Picard v. United Aircraft Corporation
128 F.2d 632 (Second Circuit, 1942)
Mason v. Hepburn
13 App. D.C. 86 (D.C. Circuit, 1898)
Stitt v. Eastern R. Co.
22 F. 649 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts, 1884)