|
|
Meccano, Ltd. v. John Wanamaker, New York, 253 U.S. 136 (1920)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Meccano, Ltd. v. John Wanamaker, New York, 253 U.S. 136 (1920)
Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 253 U.S. 117, click here.
Meccano, Ltd. v. John Wanamaker, New York No. 187 Argued January 26, 27, 1920 Decided May 17, 1920 253 U.S. 136
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
Syllabus
A decree of the Circuit Court of Appeal in a suit for infringement of patent and copyright and for unfair competition, is reviewable by this Court on certiorari, as if on appeal. P. 140. Jud.Code, §§ 128, 240.
An order of the Circuit Court of Appeals reversing an order of the district court awarding a preliminary injunction will not be reversed by this Court unless clearly erroneous. P. 141.
Upon appeal from an order granting a preliminary injunction, it is proper for the circuit court of appeals to consider a change of circumstances resulting from the reversal of a decree in another circuit upon which the district court relied. Id.
Upon an appeal under Jud.Code § 129 from an order granting a preliminary injunction against the defendant, it would be erroneous for the circuit court of appeals to grant a final decree for the plaintiff upon proof by affidavit of a recent decree in another circuit claimed to work an estoppel in plaintiff’s favor, for defendant must have opportunity to set up and establish its defenses. Id.
A conflict of views claimed to exist between the circuit court of appeals in this case and a circuit court of appeals of another circuit in a suit over the same subject and, as claimed, between the same parties in interest, held not to justify this Court in deciding the merits on interlocutory appeal. P. 142.
250 F. 450 affirmed.
The case is stated in the opinion.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Meccano, Ltd. v. John Wanamaker, New York, 253 U.S. 136 (1920) in 253 U.S. 136 253 U.S. 137. Original Sources, accessed November 22, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=4XAR6QC8WW8Z9ZC.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Meccano, Ltd. v. John Wanamaker, New York, 253 U.S. 136 (1920), in 253 U.S. 136, page 253 U.S. 137. Original Sources. 22 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=4XAR6QC8WW8Z9ZC.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Meccano, Ltd. v. John Wanamaker, New York, 253 U.S. 136 (1920). cited in 1920, 253 U.S. 136, pp.253 U.S. 137. Original Sources, retrieved 22 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=4XAR6QC8WW8Z9ZC.
|