1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 28 F.Supp.
  5. 28 F.Supp. 1013 (1939)
 

SCHICK DRY SHAVER v. R. H. MACY & CO.

28 F.Supp. 1013 (1939)

SCHICK DRY SHAVER, Inc., et al. v. R. H. MACY & CO., Inc., et al. SAME v. SEARS, ROEBUCK & CO. et al.

District Court, S. D. New York.

May 26, 1939.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Abraham Tulin and Reginald Hicks, both of New York City, for plaintiffs.

Pennie, Davis, Marvin & Edmonds, of New York City (George E. Middleton and H. Stanley Mansfield, both of New York City, of counsel), for defendants.

GODDARD, District Judge.

One of these suits was brought by the plaintiffs against R. H. Macy & Co., Inc.; the other against Sears, Roebuck & Company, both of which were selling dry shavers made by the Utility Instrument Company, which company has intervened in both cases with the consent of the plaintiffs. The suits are for infringement of patents for dry shavers. The same patents are alleged to be infringed in the two suits. Macy sells the device manufactured...

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