1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. U.S.
  4. 47 U.S.
  5. 47 U.S. 437 (1848)
 

HOGG ET AL v. EMERSON.

Not in source.

47 U.S. 437 (1848)

6 How. 437

12 L.Ed. 505

PETER HOGG AND CORNELIUS H. DELAMATER, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. JOHN B. EMERSON.

Supreme Court of United States.

March 11, 1848.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mr. Upton, for plaintiffs in error.

Mr. Morton and Mr. Cutting, for the defendant in error.

Mr. John O. Sargent, for the plaintiffs in error, in reply and conclusion.

Mr. Justice WOODBURY delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a writ of error brought under some peculiarities which are first to be noticed.

It comes here by virtue of the 17th section of the general patent law of July 4th, 1836. (5 Statutes at Large, 124.)

That section grants a writ of error from decisions in actions on patents, as in ordinary cases, and then adds the privilege of it "in all other cases...

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