1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 106 F.2d
  5. 106 F.2d 800 (1939)
 

ENTERPRISE MFG. CO. v. SHAKESPEARE CO.

Nos. 8023-8025.

106 F.2d 800 (1939)

ENTERPRISE MFG. CO. v. SHAKESPEARE CO. SHAKESPEARE CO. v. ENTERPRISE MFG. CO. et al. BRONSON REEL CO. v. SAME.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

September 18, 1939.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Albert L. Ely, of Akron, Ohio (Arthur C. Denison, of Cleveland, Ohio, and Laurence W. Smith and Smith, Strawhecker & Wetmore, all of Grand Rapids, Mich., on the brief), for Enterprise Mfg. Co.

Otis A. Earl and Ralph L. Chappell, both of Kalamazoo, Mich. (Earl & Chappell, all of Kalamazoo, Mich., on the brief), for Shakespeare Co.

Freeman, Sweet, Albrecht & Weidman, of Chicago, Ill. (Hadley F. Freeman, of Cleveland, Ohio, and Donald H. Sweet, of Chicago, Ill., on the brief), for Bronson Reel Co.

Before HICKS, SIMONS, and ALLEN, Circuit Judges.

ALLEN, Circuit Judge.

These appeals arise out of a suit by the Enterprise Manufacturing Company against the Shakespeare Company for infringement of six patents relating to fishing reels. Enterprise owns five of the patents, but legal title to the sixth (Schmid, 1,461,586) is in the Bronson Reel Company. Enterprise claims an exclusive license under Schmid, and after demand that Bronson join Enterprise as co-plaintiff in the litigation, and Bronson's refusal, Enterprise...

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