Parker v. Ferguson
This text of 18 F. Cas. 1126 (Parker v. Ferguson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
On the trial béfore
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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
18 F. Cas. 1126, 1 Blatchf. 407, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parker-v-ferguson-circtndny-1849.