STEWART-WARNER CORP.

v.

WESTERN ELECTRIC CO., INC.

Citator

Cited By

• Underwater Devices Inc. v. Morrison-Knudsen Co., Inc., 717 F.2d 1380 (Fed. Cir. 1983)
  …vice was its own in-house counsel. While this fact alone does not demonstrate M-K’s lack of good faith, it is a fact to be weighed. See Western Electric Co. v. Stewart-Warner Corp., 631 F. 2d 333, 337, 208 USPQ 183, 187 (4th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 971, 101 S.Ct. 1492, 67 L.Ed.2d 622 (1981). In addition, M-K knew or should have known that Mr. Schlanger was not a patent attorney. Again, this fact alone is not controlling, but does bear on the question whether M-K, when it sought advice, did so in g…
• Maggio v. Williams, 464 U.S. 46 (U.S. 1983)
  …ry store in Baton Rouge, La. His conviction and sentence were affirmed by the Louisiana Supreme Court. State v. Williams, 383 So. 2d 369 (1980). After we denied Williams’ petition for certiorari, 449 U. S. 1103 (1981), and his request for rehearing, 450 U. S. 971 (1981), he unsuccessfully sought a writ of habeas corpus in the Louisiana state courts. He then filed his first petition for habeas corpus in the District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana, presenting the same 13 issues that had proved unav…
• Studiengesellschaft Kohle v. Dart Indus., Inc., 862 F.2d 1564 (Fed. Cir. 1988)
  …in-house counsel is a factor to be weighed, he is incorrect when he approaches the factor with the view that use of in-house counsel is inherently wrong. Western Electric Co. v. Stewart-Warner Corp., 631 F. 2d 333, 337 (4th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 971, 101 S.Ct. 1492, 67 L.Ed.2d 622 (1981) (“Just because an attorney is in-house counsel does not mean that his opinions are necessarily suspect.”). Just as the [*1575] overall determination of willfulness is dependent on the totality of the circumstan…