William H. Seymour and Dayton S. Morgan, Plaintiffs in Error v. Cyrus H. Mccormick Book Reviews

William H. Seymour and Dayton S. Morgan, Plaintiffs in Error v. Cyrus H. Mccormick by United States Supreme Court Book Summary

Sixth. Where the claim on which the suit is founded is for an improvement on old machines, patented or unpatented, the plaintiff is not entitled to recover, as a measure of damages, the mechanical profits that he could make upon the whole machine, including the old part. His damages are limited to the profits on making and vending the improvement patented and infringed. The plaintiff recited in his declaration and furnished oyer of his old patent of 1834, for a reaping machine, which expired in 1848, and his patent of 1845, which is described as an 'improvement upon his patented machine.' In his patent of 1847, he claims 'new and useful improvements in the reaping machine formerly patented by me,' in which he also claims other improvements besides the one in controversy, which is his last claim, and relates to the seat. For the purpose of this suit, the machine described in the patent of 1834, (which had in fact become public property,) and the improvements in the patent of 1845, and a large portion of those included in that of 1847, the defendants had a perfectly lawful right to use. This covered the whole of the improved reaping machine, except what related to the seat, and its combination with the reel. It cost the defendants to make their machine, which had no seat, about $64.26. There was no proof to show the extent of the cost of the plaintiff's seat. One was made by Zinck, for one dollar. The plaintiff allowed Brown in effect, in 1845, 1846, $75 each, for making machines without the elevated seat–and he proved on this trial by Blakesley, that it cost him only $36, and by Dorman, $37, to make them with it. There can be no pretence that the addition of the seat, and what is covered by the last claim, added much, if any thing, to the cost of constructing the improved machine. The plaintiff proved by Blakesley, that the manufacturer's profit on the whole machine, including a $30 patent fee, was $74.

👋 Do you love William H. Seymour and Dayton S. Morgan, Plaintiffs in Error v. Cyrus H. Mccormick books? Please share your friends!

William H. Seymour and Dayton S. Morgan, Plaintiffs in Error v. Cyrus H. Mccormick (United States Supreme Court) Book Reviews 2024

United States Supreme Court - William H. Seymour and Dayton S. Morgan, Plaintiffs in Error v. Cyrus H. Mccormick Discussions & Comments

Have you read this book yet? What do you think about William H. Seymour and Dayton S. Morgan, Plaintiffs in Error v. Cyrus H. Mccormick by United States Supreme Court book? Ask the bookpedia.co community a question about William H. Seymour and Dayton S. Morgan, Plaintiffs in Error v. Cyrus H. Mccormick!