Case law

Municipal Signal Co. v. Gamewell Fire Alarm Tel. Co.

52 F. 459 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Aug 10, 1892

One of the board of police also visited the office, and he testifies as to the operation of the system. … Municipal Signal Co. v. Gamewell Eire Alarm Tel. Co., (No. 2,537,) 52 Fed. Rep. 468, Municipal Signal Co. v. Gamewell Fire Alarm Tel. Co., (No. 2,589,) 52 Fed. Rep. 464, and Gamewell Fire Alarm Tel. Co. v.

Perkins v. Hill

19 F. Cas. 250 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1846

Moore v. Wilson, 1 Durn. & E. [1 Term R.] 609; Robinson v. Marine Ins. Co., 2 Johns. 323 . … Shipp. 286; Clarkson v. Edes, 4 Cow. 470 ; 3 Bing. 283; 13 East, 399; Small v. Moates, 9 Bing. 574; Faith v. East India Co., 4 Barn. & Ald. 630.

Kirwin v. Boston & O. Mining Co.

171 F. 900 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Dec 30, 1908

There lias been no public notice of this application, without which, as this court lias said in Hutchinson v. American Palace Car Co. (C. … It was said in Hutchinson v.

Dole v. New England Mutual Marine Ins.

7 F. Cas. 837 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1864

Jones v. Schmoll. 1 Term R. 130, note; Delano v. Bedford Ins. Co., 10 Mass. 333 ; Law v. Goddard; 12 Mass. 113 . … Livie v. Janson, 12 East, 653; Rice v. Homer, 12 Mass. 234 .

Ames v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.

166 F. 820 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Jan 14, 1909

BROWN, District Judge. The declaration is framed in reliance upon the Sherman anti-trust act (Act July 2, 1890, c. 647, § 1, 26 Stat. 209 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 8200]), and claims threefold damages under that act. … The cases of Pidcock v. Harrington (C. C.) 64 Fed. 821 , Gulf, C. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Miami S. S. Co., 86 Fed. 407 , 30 C. C. A. 112 , and Southern Indiana Ext. Co. v. U. S. Exp. Co. (C.

Charge to Grand Jury

30 F. Cas. 997 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 15, 1861

S. v. Coombs, 12 Pet. [37 U. S.] 72. … S. v. Palmer. 3 Wheat. [10 U. S.] 618, 634. 635; U. S. v. Klintock, 5 Wheat. [18 U. S.] 144, 149: U. S. v. Smith, Id. 153, 155, 161, 162 ; U. S. v. Pirates. Id. 193, 194, 197 . See, also, The Palmyra, 12 Wheat. [25 U.

Winsor v. McLellan

30 F. Cas. 323 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1843

. §55 122S, 1229, 1411; Langton v. Horton, 1 Hare, 549, 563; Muir v. Schenck,' 3 Hill, 228 ; Murray v. Lylburn, 2 Johns. Ch. 441, 443 ; Deac. Bankr. (Ed. 1827) pp. 320, 321, e. 10, § 3. … This was clearly laid down by Lord Hardwicke in Brown v. Heathcote, 1 Atk. 160, 162, and has ever since been adhered to, not only in courts of equity, but also, as the case of Leslie v. Guthrie, 1 Bing. (N.

City of Boston v. Crowley

38 F. 202 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Mar 21, 1889

The board of harbor commissioners was created in 1866-. … Oates v. Bank, 100 U. S. 239 ; Watson v. Tarpley, 18 How. 517 ; Swift v. Tyson, 16 Pet. 1 .

In re Kingsley

14 F. Cas. 587 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Feb 15, 1868

Hunter v. Potts, 4 Term R. 182; Potter v. Brown, 5 East, 124; May v. Breed, 7 Cush. 15 ; Story, Confl. Laws, § 335, &c. The hardship of this rule is much less than might at first appear. … Richardson v. Thomas, 13 Gray, 381 ; Roscoe v. Hale, 7 Gray, 274 ; Stoddard v. Doane, Id. 387; and see the cases in Roscoe v. Hale.

Pope v. Nickerson

19 F. Cas. 1022 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1844

There is much wholesome doctrine on this subject in the cases of Reid v. Darby, 10 East, 149, of Freeman v. East India Co., 5 Barn. & Ald. 619, and of Morris v. … See The Sarah Ann [Case No. 12,342]; Hunter v. Parker, 7 Mees. & W. 340, 342; Gordon v. Massachusetts Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 2 Pick. 249 : Bryant v. Commonwealth Ins. Co., G Pick. 131.

Heaton-Peninsular Button Fastener Co. v. Rooney

65 F. 96 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Dec 27, 1894

This patent came before this court for consideration in Peninsular Novelty Co. v. American Shoe-Tip Co., 39 Fed. 791 , and was held to be valid. … The next case was brought by the Peninsular Novelty Co. v. Olds, 1 in the circuit court for the Western district of Michigan.

Price v. Whitney

28 F. 297 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Jul 30, 1886

Davis v. Society of Essex, 44 Conn. 582 ; Adderly v. Storm, 6 Hill, 624 ; Anderson v. Philadelphia Warehouse Co., 111 U. S. 479, 483 ; S. C. 4 Sup. Ct. Rep. 525; Johnston v. Laflin, 103 U. S. 800, 804 ; Turnbull v. … S. 418 ; Brown v. Adams, 5 Biss. 181 .

Dadirrian v. Yacubian

90 F. 812 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Dec 1, 1898

Yan Lennep, late missionary of the American board in Turkey, writes to Dr. … We think this case is clearly governed by the opinion of the supreme court in the leading case of Canal Co. v. Clark, 13 Wall. 311 .

The Sam Slick

21 F. Cas. 292 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1855

Chief Justice Marshall in the case of The Patriot [Thomson v. U. … Clementson v. Williams, 8 Cranch [12 U. S.] 72; McIver v. Ragan, 2 Wheat. [15 U. S.] 25; Bank of State of Alabama v. Dalton, 9 How. [50 U. S.] 522.

Homans v. Newton

4 F. 880 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Dec 21, 1880

Ed.;) Clark v. Wells, 45 Vt. 4 ; Duncan v. Stone, Id. 118 ; Dunbar v. Rawles, 28 Ind. 225 ; Griffin v. Push, 44 Mo. 412 ; Ridgeway v. Kennedy, 52 Mo. 24 ; Bailey v. Harris, 8 Iowa, 331 ; Robinson v. … Angier v. Taunton Manuf’g Co. 1 Gray, 621 ; Brown v. Haynes, 52 Maine, 578; Duncan v. Stone, 45 Vt. 118 .

Bangor Electric Light & Power Co. v. Robinson

52 F. 520 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Sep 20, 1892

Hodge, 21 How. 397 ; Bank v. Lanier, 11 Wall. 369 ; Vermilye v. Express Co., 21 Wall. 138 ; Parsons v. Jackson, 99 U. S. 434 ; Cowdrey v. Vandenburg, 101 U. S. 572 ; Railway Co. v. Sprague, 103 U. … S. 756 , and Hammond v. Hastings, 134 U. S. 401, 404 ,10 Sup. Ct. Rep. 727. Pub. St. Mass. c. 78, § 6, is apparently aimed only at stockjobbing, as is shown by the reference in Brown v.

Bradley v. Converse

3 F. Cas. 1138 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 15, 1876

Foster v. Goddard, 1 Black [66 U. S.] 518; Boone v. Chiles, 10 Pet. [35 U. S.] 208. … Harrison, v. Nixon, 9 Pet. [34 U. S.] 502; Gordon v. Gordon, 3 Swanst. 472.

Winterport Granite & Brick Co. v. The Jasper

30 F. Cas. 373 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Feb 15, 1872

The master remained on board, and with some assistance took the vessel to Rockland, where the wood was landed and subsequently sold. • In October. 18(58, this libel was filed, alleging the shipment of ninety-five cords of … Adams v. Lindsell, 1 Barn. & Ald. 681; Dunlop v. Higgins, 1 H. L. Cas. 381; Tayloe v. Merchants’ Fire Ins. Co., 9 How. [50 U. S.] 390; The Palo Alto [Case No. 10,700]; Mactier v. Frith, 6 Wend. 103 .

Moffitt v. Rogers

8 F. 147 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Jul 2, 1881

In the case of Brook v. Ashton, 8 E. & B. 478, affirmed, 32 L. T. … Leggett v. Avery, 102 U. S. 256 . Bill dismissed with costs.

Haven v. Holland

11 F. Cas. 846 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 15, 1820

He is to consult the safety of the persons and property on, board, in the best manner he can. He may lay to, or "chase the enemy ship, if he deem that the most effectual means of securing his object. … See Jolly v. Walker, Marsh. Ins. 195; Parr v. Anderson, 6 East, 202: Park, Ins. (6th Ed.) 399; Hooe v. Mason, 1 Wash. [Va.] 207, 211. See Parr v.