Young v. Griswold Mfg. Co.

25 F.2d 722, 1928 U.S. App. LEXIS 3064
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit
DecidedApril 17, 1928
DocketNo. 3710
StatusPublished

This text of 25 F.2d 722 (Young v. Griswold Mfg. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Young v. Griswold Mfg. Co., 25 F.2d 722, 1928 U.S. App. LEXIS 3064 (3d Cir. 1928).

Opinion

BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judge.

After argument and due consideration had, we find no sufficient ground to warrant our disturbing what we have already decided. As appears by the letter of counsel dated April 30, 1927, the defendants, in advance of the hearing by this court, knew that the infringing dampers were bought by the plaintiff. With that knowledge the case was proceeded in and submitted to our determination on the merits of the patent and infringement thereof by the sale of the dampers bought by the plaintiff. Having thus chanced the decision of the ease, the defendant will not now he heard to question a jurisdiction which it has participated in and invited exercise thereof.

Accordingly the petition is dismissed.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
25 F.2d 722, 1928 U.S. App. LEXIS 3064, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/young-v-griswold-mfg-co-ca3-1928.