ALUMINUM COLORS INCORPORATED v. THE EMPIRE PLATING CO.

No. 4607.

5 F.Supp. 687 (1933)

ALUMINUM COLORS INCORPORATED v. THE EMPIRE PLATING CO.

District Court, N. D. Ohio, E. D.

December 28, 1933.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Brockett, Hyde, Higley & Meyer, of Cleveland, Ohio (John W. Meyer, of Cleveland, Ohio, and C. B. Townsend, of New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff.

Evans & McCoy, of Cleveland, Ohio, for respondents.


WEST, District Judge.

This matter has been submitted on an order requiring respondents Clark, Hammer, and Foley, to show cause why they should not be punished for contempt for violating an injunction which followed a decree pro confesso in plaintiff's favor, in a patent suit. The motion of respondents to quash the order was not insisted upon and is denied.

The injunction was directed to the defendant the Empire Plating...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases