Thomson-Houston Electric Co. v. Nassau Electric R. Co.

119 F. 354, 56 C.C.A. 96, 1902 U.S. App. LEXIS 4679
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided November 6, 1902·No. No. 2·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

As the appeal in this cause is from an interlocutory decree, it lies only to that part of the decree which grants an in* junction, and if there is no longer any controversy between the parties touching the right of the complainant to enjoin the infringement [355] alleged in the bill the appeal presents no real controversy for decision. The counsel for the appellant has very properly called the attention of the court to that part of the record which discloses the present relation of the parties to the controversy, and indicates that it has been settled, except as it relates to a recovery of profits and damages, and the statement and documents submitted by counsel for the appellee substantiate what appears in the record. '

As there is no real and substantial controversy still existing between the parties which is presented by the appeal, the court ought not to hear the appeal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

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

Thomson-Houston Electric Co. v. Nassau Electric R. Co., 119 F. 354, 56 C.C.A. 96, 1902 U.S. App. LEXIS 4679 (2d Cir. 1902).

119 F. 354 (Thomson-Houston Electric Co. v. Nassau Electric R. Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Princeton Coal & Mining Co. v. Gilmore
83 N.E. 500 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1908)
Timolat v. Philadelphia Pneumatic Tool Co.
130 F. 903 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1904)