1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 16 F.Supp.
  5. 16 F.Supp. 846 (1936)
 

UNIVERSAL OIL PRODUCTS CO. v. ROOT REFINING CO.

Nos. 716 and 895, 893 and 785.

16 F.Supp. 846 (1936)

UNIVERSAL OIL PRODUCTS CO. v. ROOT REFINING CO. SAME v. SKELLY OIL CO.

District Court, D. Delaware.

October 9, 1936.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Thomas G. Haight (of Wall, Haight, Carey & Hartpence), of Jersey City, N. J., William F. Hall and Charles M. Thomas (of Bacon & Thomas), both of Washington, D. C., and E. Ennalls Berl (of Ward & Gray), of Wilmington, Del., for plaintiff.

J. Bernard Thiess, Thorley von Holst, and Sidney Neuman (of Jones, Addington, Ames & Seibold), all of Chicago, Ill., and Arthur G. Logan (of Marvel, Morford, Ward & Logan), of Wilmington, Del., for defendants.

W. P. Z. German, of Tulsa, Okl., of counsel for Skelly Oil Co.

NIELDS, District Judge.

Hearing on issues raised by a special defense in answers to original bills in the nature of supplemental bills.

These supplemental bills aver that on January 14, 1936, plaintiff had "assigned its entire right, title and interest in and to the aforesaid invention and improvement, and in and to said letters patent" to Universal Oil Products Company, a Delaware corporation, and prayed that the...

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