1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 38 F.Supp.
  5. 38 F.Supp. 38 (1941)
 

CROSLEY CORPORATION v. HAZELTINE CORPORATION

No. 194 Civil Action.

38 F.Supp. 38 (1941)

CROSLEY CORPORATION v. HAZELTINE CORPORATION.

District Court, D. Delaware.

As Amended April 19, 1941.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Samuel E. Darby, Jr. (of Darby & Darby), of New York City, and Hugh M. Morris and S. Samuel Arsht, both of Wilmington, Del., for plaintiff.

R. Morton Adams and John Hoxie (of Pennie, Davis, Marvin & Edmonds), both of New York City, and E. Ennalls Berl (of Southerland, Berl, Potter & Leahy), of Wilmington, Del., for defendant.

NIELDS, District Judge.

Motion for preliminary injunction.

This is a suit for declaratory judgment under U.S.C.A. Title 28, Section 400, brought by the Crosley Corporation, plaintiff, a corporation of Ohio, against Hazeltine Corporation, defendant, a corporation of Delaware. Jurisdiction is based upon the patent statutes.

Plaintiff alleges that defendant has asserted that "Crosley" radio receivers manufactured and sold by plaintiff and its agents are...

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