THE HARTFORD RUBBER WORKS COMPANY, PETITIONER,

v.

METALLIC RUBBER TIRE COMPANY

Citator

Cited By

• Elec. Pipe Line, Inc. v. Fluid Sys., 250 F.2d 697 (2d Cir. 1957)
  …ss Co., 3 Cir., 219 F. 199, certiorari denied 238 U.S. 623, 35 S.Ct. 661, 59 L.Ed. 1494; Oil Well Improvements Co. v. Acme Foundry & Machine Co., 8 Cir., 31 F. 2d 898; Bemis Car Box Co. v. J. G. Brill Co., 3 Cir., 200 F. 749, 765, certiorari denied 226 U.S. 614, 33 S.Ct. 326, 57 L.Ed. 382. The Master found that Fluid Systems would have incurred no increase in general overhead expenses had it undertaken the thirty-seven installations for which it was allowed recovery of lost profits. Over the period in que…
• Arlac Dry Stencil Corp. v. A. B. Dick Co., 46 F.2d 899 (3d Cir. 1931)
  …of the claims, in respect to which they admit the decree is res judicata of that issue in this suit, Lander v. Mercantile Bank, 186 U. S. 458, 22 S. Ct. 908, 46 L. Ed. 1247; Bemis Car Box Co. v. J. G. Brill Co., 200 F. 749, 751 (C. C. A. 3rd) ; Id., 226 U. S. 614, 33 S. Ct. 326, 57 L. Ed. 382, and that of infringement by a composition of matter (cellulose nitrate and castor oil) different from that charged as infringement in this suit (cellulose nitrato, oleic acid, or rod oil, and glycerin), and therefore u…