Sea Gull Specialty Co. v. Humphrey
242 F. 271, 155 C.C.A. 111, 1917 U.S. App. LEXIS 1885
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedApril 28, 1917
DocketNo. 3030
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases
This text of 242 F. 271 (Sea Gull Specialty Co. v. Humphrey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Sea Gull Specialty Co. v. Humphrey, 242 F. 271, 155 C.C.A. 111, 1917 U.S. App. LEXIS 1885 (5th Cir. 1917).
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
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)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
242 F. 271, 155 C.C.A. 111, 1917 U.S. App. LEXIS 1885, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sea-gull-specialty-co-v-humphrey-ca5-1917.