Sea Gull Specialty Co. v. Humphrey
242 F. 271, 155 C.C.A. 111, 1917 U.S. App. LEXIS 1885
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided April 28, 1917·No. No. 3030·Published·Cited by 5 cases
Opinion
None of the assignments of error in the appeal' are well taken. Cross-appellants should have their award for damages for infringement increased by the addition of an amount equal to interest at 5 per cent, from judicial demand to judgment.
The decree will be so amended, and, so amended, will be affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Sea Gull Specialty Co. v. Humphrey, 242 F. 271, 155 C.C.A. 111, 1917 U.S. App. LEXIS 1885 (5th Cir. 1917).
242 F. 271 (Sea Gull Specialty Co. v. Humphrey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Universal Oil Products Co. v. Vickers Petroleum Co.
19 A.2d 727 (Superior Court of Delaware, 1941)
Nachod & United States Signal Co. v. Automatic Signal Corp.
105 F.2d 981 (Second Circuit, 1939)
Frost Ry. Supply Co. v. T. H. Symington & Son, Inc.
24 F. Supp. 20 (D. Maryland, 1938)
Lathrop v. Rice & Adams Corporation
17 F. Supp. 622 (W.D. New York, 1936)