IMPERIAL APPLIANCE CORP. v. HAMILTON MANUFACTURING CO.

No. 63-C-291.

239 F.Supp. 175 (1965)

IMPERIAL APPLIANCE CORPORATION and Thomas J. Linane, Plaintiffs, v. HAMILTON MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Defendant.

United States District Court E. D. Wisconsin.

March 19, 1965.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Paul R. Puerner, Michael, Best & Friedrich, Milwaukee, Wis., for plaintiffs.

A. F. Rankin Clark, Rankin, Nash & Spindler, Manitowoc, Wis., L. C. Noyes, Hibben, Noyes & Bicknell, Chicago, Ill., of counsel, for defendant.


GRUBB, District Judge.

This action for recovery of royalties on sales of clothes drying machines is before the court on defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the action is not prosecuted by the real parties in interest, and defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint for failure to state a cause of action.

1. Motion to dismiss.

In the agreements between the parties, Imperial Appliance Corporation (hereinafter...

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