Ryder v. Holt

Supreme Court

Ryder v. Holt

128 U.S. 525, 9 S. Ct. 145, 32 L. Ed. 529, 1888 U.S. LEXIS 2247

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedDecember 10, 1888

Docket76

StatusPublished

Cited by18 cases

This text of 128 U.S. 525 (Ryder v. Holt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ryder v. Holt, 128 U.S. 525, 9 S. Ct. 145, 32 L. Ed. 529, 1888 U.S. LEXIS 2247 (1888).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Chief Justice Fuller

delivered the opinion of the court.

It was stipulated in the Circuit Court that this cause should abide the event of Menendez v. Holt, ante, 514, just decided, and the <;same decree in favor of complainants was, therefore, rendered in this as in that case. But it is now assigned for error that, as defendant and' complainants below were citizens of the same State, and the bill did not allege that the trade-mark' in controversy was “ used on goods intended to be transported to a foreign country,” Act of March 3, 1881, c. 138, § 11,. 21 Stat. 502, the Circuit Court had no jurisdiction, and the decree must be reversed for that reason. The objection is well taken, and the decree is accordingly ' '

Reversed.

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

Mr. Chief Justice Fuller

delivered the opinion of the court.

It was stipulated in the Circuit Court that this cause should abide the event of Menendez v. Holt, ante, 514, just decided, and the <;same decree in favor of complainants was, therefore, rendered in this as in that case. But it is now assigned for error that, as defendant and' complainants below were citizens of the same State, and the bill did not allege that the trade-mark' in controversy was “ used on goods intended to be transported to a foreign country,” Act of March 3, 1881, c. 138, § 11,. 21 Stat. 502, the Circuit Court had no jurisdiction, and the decree must be reversed for that reason. The objection is well taken, and the decree is accordingly ' '

Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

128 U.S. 525, 9 S. Ct. 145, 32 L. Ed. 529, 1888 U.S. LEXIS 2247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ryder-v-holt-scotus-1888.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack