1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 25 F.Supp.
  5. 25 F.Supp. 934 (1938)
 

CHARLES BLUM ADVERTISING CORPORATION v. L. & C. MAYERS CO.

No. 10067.

25 F.Supp. 934 (1938)

CHARLES BLUM ADVERTISING CORPORATION v. L. & C. MAYERS CO., Inc.

District Court, E. D. Pennsylvania.

December 2, 1938.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Arthur E. Paige and Frank E. Paige, both of Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiff.

Julius C. Baylinson, of Philadelphia, Pa., and A. C. Nolte and James N. Catlow, both of New York City, for defendant.

DICKINSON, District Judge.

This motion is brought under Rule 56 of the new Rules of Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c. They are meant to simplify and shorten legal controversies by substituting a new method of procedure for those formerly in use.

This is a Bill in Equity of the type familiar to the Patent Bar. All the controversies evoked by it can be, so far as this Court is concerned, disposed of finally at a Trial Hearing. Any Bill under 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