For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am. Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER

IV. APPLICATIONS AND PROCEEDINGS
THEREON.

113(7) (D.C.) Concurrent decisions as to
reduction to practice and diligence not disturb-
ed.-Dunham v. Dyson, 206.

Patent tribunals held regarded as in accord
as to date of conception.-Id.

234 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Presence of infinitesi-
mal amount of air, performing no function, does
not make audion a "vapor conductor."-Hewitt
v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co., 194.
234 (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Not infringed by de-
vice of different construction, different mode of
operation, and different result.-Edwards Mfg.
Co. v. National Fireworks Distributing Co., 23.
for lap-

IX. CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF 235 (U.S.C.C.A.Pa.) Machine

LETTERS PATENT.

grinding optical lenses does not infringe patent
for ring-grinding machine.-Paige v. Brown,
686.

(B) Limitation of Claims.
165 (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Unambiguous claims 237 (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Manual handling not
cannot be saved by limitations.-Republic Iron equivalent of mechanism for handling.-Repub-
& Steel Co. v. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co., lic Iron & Steel Co. v. Youngstown Sheet &
386.
Tube Co., 386.
167(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Claims must be 241 (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) One relying on ex-
read with specifications to determine scope.— press limitation in patent should be protected
Troy Wagon Works Co. v. Ohio Trailer Co., against claim of infringement.-Republic Iron
850.
& Steel Co. v. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co.,
386.

168 (2) (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Amendment to
meet Patent Office's view as to proper desig-245 (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Old element cannot
nation of parts held not an estoppel limitation. be considered equivalent of new element, on
-Edwards Mfg. Co. v. National Fireworks which claim of novelty is based.-Troy Wagon
Distributing Co., 23.
Works Co. v. Ohio Trailer Co., 850.
Substitution of old element in combination
held substantial, not colorable, change.-Id.

174 (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Claim not narrowly
construed, to extent that it introduced new
element into the art.-Edwards Mfg. Co. v. Na-
tional Fireworks Distributing Co., 23.

178 (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Not to be denied
equivalents, differing only in form and arrange-
ment, though art crowded.-Edwards Mfg. Co.
v. National Fireworks Distributing Co., 23.

X. TITLE, CONVEYANCES, AND CON-
TRACTS.

(C) Licenses and Contracts.
209 (1) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Embodiment
of
invention in machine is reduction to practice,
which will sustain license. Keystone Type
Foundry v. Fastpress Co., 242.

311 (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Unfair competition,
pleaded as aggravation of infringement, not
considered, in absence of infringement.-Troy
Wagon Works Co. v. Ohio Trailer Co., 850.
210 (U.S.C.C.A.Pa.) Employer not vested 318(1) (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Statute excluding re-
with entire property right of employee's inven-
tion or with anything more than shop right.
Ingle v. Landis Tool Co., 464.

covery of "damages" does not exclude profits.-
Shapiro & Aronson v. Franklin Brass Foundry,
176.

319(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Mich.) Evidence held to
sustain report fixing 10 per cent. of selling
price as reasonable royalty.-Dunkley Co. v.
Vrooman, 468.

319(4) (U.S.D.C.Mich.) Interest on royal-
ties before master's report held properly de-
nied.-Dunkley Co. v. Vrooman, 468.

322 (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Fact of notice to in-
fringer, by marking or otherwise, must be found
by court.-Shapiro & Aronson Franklin
Brass Foundry, 176.

V.

Where infringement is found, complainant is
entitled to a full inquiry into its extent.---Id.

326(4) (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Difficult question
of infringement not decided on motion to pun-
ish for contempt.-Metropolitan Sewing Ma-
chine Corporation v. American Perfect Binder
Co., 520.

Request by defendant for determination of
infringement on contempt motion does not au-
thorize such determination.-Id.

327 (U.S.D.C.Me.) Owner, defeated in in-
fringement suit, cannot bring subsequent suits
for infringement by same article of another
claim.--Union Steam Pump Co. v. Manton-
Gaulin Mfg. Co., 773.

For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER

III. RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES AS TO

THIRD PERSONS.

(A) Powers of Agent.

103(7) (U.S.C.C.A.Canal Zone) Agent held
authorized to make contract; "quote."-Texas
Co. v. American Trade Developing Co., 670.

(B) Undisclosed Agency.

143(4) (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Undisclosed princi-
pal may adopt and sue on agent's contract for
transportation.-Bashinsky Cotton Co. v. Sun-
set Lighterage Corporation, 120.

145(4) (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) May be held jointly
liable for breach of warranty of seaworthiness
of vessel.-The Jungshoved, 122.

PRINCIPAL AND SURETY.

1. CREATION AND EXISTENCE OF RE-

LATION.

(B) Surety Companies.

RAILROADS.

I. CONTROL AND REGULATION IN
GENERAL.

52 [New, vol. 6A Key-No. Series]

(U.S.C.C.A.Or.) Offense under Federal
Control Act proved.-Vaughn v. U. S., 451.
VII. SALES, LEASES, TRAFFIC CON-
TRACTS, AND CONSOLIDATION.

133 (5) (U.S.C.C.A.Tex.) State not indispen-
sable party to suit to cancel leases.-U. S. Mort-
gage & Trust Co. v. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co.
of Texas, 458.

X. OPERATION.

(D) Injuries to Licensees or Trespassers
in General.

276(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Ky.) Liable only for
willful or wanton injury to trespasser on train.
-Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co. v. Lovett,
421.

55 (U.S.C.C.A.Pa.) Surety company's vice
president held authorized to consent to pay-282(11) (U.S.C.C.A.Ky.) Evidence of will-
ments before agreed time of payment.-Globe ful injury to trespasser on train held insuffi-
Indemnity Co. v. Unity Rys. Co., 607.
cient to go to jury.-Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P.
Ry. Co. v. Lovett, 421.

III. DISCHARGE OF SURETY.
100(4) (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Owner held not en-
titled to recover from surety on builder's con-
tract by reason of changes in construction.
Edward G. Budd Mfg. Co. v. Etna Casualty
& Surety Co., 775.

115(1) (U.S.D.C.Ohio) Release of security
for debt releases surety only pro tanto.-In re
Roth, 516.

117 (U.S.C.C.A.Pa.) Motives or results do
not justify payments before contract time.-
Globe Indemnity Co. v. Unity Rys. Co., 607.

(F) Accidents at Crossings.

327 (2) (U.S.C.C.A.Neb.) Auto-truck driver
chargeable with contributory negligence.-Gor-
don Fireproof Warehouse & Van Co. v. Hines,
604.

(G) Injuries to Persons on or near Tracks.
400 (6) (U.S.C.C.A.Va.) Negligent injury in
yards held question for jury.-Hines v. Kountis,
105.

See Ejectment.

REAL ACTIONS.

IV. REMEDIES OF CREDITORS.
162(3) (U.S.C.C.A.Pa.) Instruction sub-
mitting question whether payments to princi-
cipal were with surety's knowledge and ac-
quiescerce not erroneous.-Globe Indemnity III. TITLE TO AND POSSESSION OF PROP-
Co. v. Unity Rys. Co., 607.

PROMISSORY NOTES.

See Bills and Notes.

PROSTITUTION.

RECEIVERS.

ERTY.

77(1) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Appointment does
not disturb liens or rights of third persons.-
Wright v. Seaboard Steel & Manganese Corpo-
ration, 807.

4 (U.S.C.C.A.W.Va.) Instruction, in prose-178
cution under White Slave Traffic Act, that cer-
tain evidence was immaterial, held erroneous.-
England v. U. S., 102.

PUBLIC LANDS.

III. DISPOSAL OF LANDS OF THE STATES.

VI. ACTIONS.

(U.S.C.C.A.Tex.) Not indispensable
party to suit to cancel leases by company whose
bonds are owned by his company.-U. S. Mort-
gage & Trust Co. v. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co.
of Texas, 458.

VII. ACCOUNTING AND COMPENSATION.
183 (U.S.C.C.A.Va.) Evidence held to war-changing terms of order for compensation, un-
199 (U.S.C.C.A.III.) Nunc pro tunc entry,
rant finding that grant from the state was not authorized.-Jackson v. Smietanka, 970.
proved.-Craig-Giles Iron Co. v. Brownlee, 74.
PUBLIC SERVICE CORPORATIONS.
See Telegraphs and Telephones; Railroads;
Carriers.
QUO WARRANTO.

RELEASE.

[right to cumulate deficiencies in amounts or-
dered from month to month.-Consolidation
Coal Co. v. Peninsular Portland Cement Co.,
625.

II. CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION.
29(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Or.) Settlement with sub-
contractors held to release shipbuilder.-Spiess 81(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Pa.) Contract held to bind
v. Sommarstrom Ship Building Co., 109.

REMOVAL OF CAUSES.

V. AMOUNT OR VALUE IN CONTROVERSY.
72 (U.S.D.C.Or.) Common-law action for
personal injuries on vessel held properly
brought in state court.-Ross v. Pacific S. S.
Co., 538.

seller to make shipment, but not delivery, with-
in certain time.-Pottash v. Herman Reach &
Co., 658.
held

to

85(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Pa.) Contract
preclude rejection for shortage in delivery.-
Pottash v. Herman Reach & Co., 658.
85(2) (U.S.C.C.A.Mich.) Car shortages are
"contingencies of transportation" and "causes
beyond control" in coal contract.-Consolida-
tion Coal Co. v. Peninsular Portland Cement
Co., 625.
89 (2) (U.S.D.C.Cal.) State court can
85(2) (U.S.D.C.Ohio) Law making
fuse removal only for want of substantive show-formance of contract at the time specified im-
ing.-Gopcevic v. California Packing Corpora- possible discharges both parties under contract
tion, 994.
provisions.-Edward Maurer Co. v. Tubeless
Tire Co., 990.

VI. PROCEEDINGS TO PROCURE AND EF.
FECT OF REMOVAL.

re-

VII. REMAND OR DISMISSAL OF CAUSE.
102 (U.S.D.C.Cal) Motion to remand
granted, where removal was to wrong division.
-Gopcevic v. California Packing Corporation,
994.

(C) Delivery and

per-

IV. PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT.
Acceptance of Goods.
172 (U.S.C.C.A.Mich.) Seller's right to pro-
rate shipments in case of car shortage depends
on good faith.-Consolidation Coal Co. v. Pen-
insular Portland Cement Co., 625.

106 (U.S.D.C.Cal.) Plaintiff's failure to ob-
ject in state court does not waive objection by
motion to remand.-Gopcevic V. California 174 (U.S.C.C.A.III.) Buyer held not
Packing Corporation, 994.

REPLEVIN.

I. RIGHT OF ACTION AND DEFENSES.
10 (U.S.C.C.A.P.R.) Porto Rico statutes
held to give right of action only against party
in possession.-Berio v. Gay, 404.

Under Porto Rico statutes, plaintiff cannot
recover value, unless defendant had possession
when action was commenced.-Id.

REVIEW.

See Appeal and Error.

RIPARIAN RIGHTS.

See Navigable Waters, 44, 45.

SALES.

I. REQUISITES AND VALIDITY OF CON-
TRACT.

1(4) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Blanket orders for
manufacture of shoes held contracts when ac-
cepted.-Carroll v. Melville Shoe Corporation,

49.

2 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Law of domicile does
not always govern transfers of personalty.-
Gaston, Williams & Wigmore of Canada v.
Warner, 56.

held

267 (U.S.C.C.A.Pa.) Contract held to take
away right to reject for breach of implied war-
ranty.-Pottash v. Herman Reach & Co., 658.

VIII. REMEDIES OF BUYER.

(C) Actions for Breach of Contract.
411 (U.S.C.C.A.La.) Petition held to allege
sufficiently a putting of the seller in default.-
J. N. Pharr & Sons v. C. D. Kenny Co., 37.

Petition in buyer's action held not to limit
buyer's rights to sugar manufactured in par-
ticular parish.-Id.

416(2) (U.S.C.C.A.Mont.) Evidence of
market value of sheep held admissible to show
damages for breach of contract.-Johnson v.
Hislop, 913.

418(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Mich.) In action for
failure to deliver coal plaintiff entitled to fair
share of cars diverted, and no damages for
failure to deliver cars of others.-Consolidation
Coal Co. v. Peninsular Portland Cement Co.,
625.
Ascertained

6 (U.S. C. C. A. Tenn.) Transaction
pledge, and not sale, of accounts.-Petition of 418(15) (U.S.C.C.A.Mont.)
National Discount Co., 570.

II. CONSTRUCTION OF CONTRACT.
68 (U.S.C.C.A.La.) Contract of sale con-
tingent on causes beyond seller's control held
to include sugar manufactured from purchased
cane.-J. N. Pharr & Sons v. C. D. Kenny Co.,
37.

~~71(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Mich.) Parties held to
have construed contract for coal to give buyer

profits lost by breach of contract may be re-
covered.-Johnson v. Hislop, 913.

420 (U.S.C.C.A.La.) Measure of damages
for breach of contract of sale properly left to
jury, notwithstanding profit fixed by Food Ad-
ministration.-J. N. Pharr & Sons v. C. D. Ken-
ny Co.. 37.

421 (U.S.C.C.A.Mont.) Instruction on
"burden of proof" of delivery held correct.-
Johnson v. Hislop, 913.

1051

INDEX-DIGEST

For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER

SALVAGE.

I. RIGHT TO COMPENSATION.
10 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Tug awarded salvage for
service in preventing spread of fire.-Lee v.
City of New York, 782.

II. AMOUNT AND APPORTIONMENT.

31 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Difference between val-

Shipping

Evidence insufficient to show person whose
home was searched waived constitutional rights.
-Id.

SENTENCE.

See Criminal Law, 980.

ue after raising and cost of raising held not See Drains.
salved value.-The Ronald J. Brown, 345.

Value of cargo must be considered, though
not seized on libel.-Id.

Tugs allowed $250 for assistance to barge on
fire.-Id.

SEAMEN.

SEWERS.

SHIPPING.

See Salvage; Wharves.

II. TITLE.

22 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) One letting barge with-
(U.S.D.C.Md.) Statute relative to pay- out disclosing ownership liable for its unsea-
ment of hospital expenses not limited to passen- worthiness.-The Jungshoved, 122.
ger vessels.-Franco v. Seas Shipping Corpo-33 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Sale passes title, re-
ration, 542.
gardless of registration.-Gaston, Williams &
24 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Demand for half Wigmore of Canada v. Warner, 56.
wages must be reasonable and be plainly made.
-The Hougomont, 881.

Payments previously made are to be deduct-
ed from half of wages payable at intermediate
port.-Id.

26 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Evidence held not to
show demand for half wages.-The Hougomont,
881.

III. CHARTERS.

42 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Implied warranty of sea-
worthiness of chartered barge.-The Jungshov-
ed. 122.
Charter demise carries implied warranty of
seaworthiness.--Id.

29(3) (U.S.C.C.A.Va.) Under federal stat-54 (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Implied agreement to re-
utes foreman of pile driver scow not a fellow Transportation Co. v. National Dredging &
turn does not make charterer insurer.-Turney
servant of seaman.-George Leary Const. Co.
v. Matson, 461.
Lighterage Co., 495.

Owner of scow responsible for selection by
foreman of unfit appliance.-Id.

charge

33 (U.S.C.C.A.Cal.) Refusal of
held without fair ground of dispute.-Vincent
v. U. S., 889.

Charterer liable for improper loading over
protest of lighter's master.-Id.

57 (U.S.D.C.N.J.) Master operating on
Peters v. Rohrman, 338.
shares not necessarily owner pro hac vice.-

Master held "owner pro hac vice," and own-
ers not liable for his breaches of contract.-Id.

Payment of full wages claimed on penalty of
double wages for wrongful refusal to pay.-Id.
33 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Penalty for refusal58(2) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Evidence held not
of half wages held waived by acceptance of to show capsizing of barge was caused by im-
part payment.-The Hougomont, 881.
proper method of loading.-Hastorf Contract-
Right to penalty for refusal of half wages is ing Co. v. Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey,
waived by voluntarily remaining on the vessel. 58(2) (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Evidence held to show

7 (U.S.D.C.Ohio) Inadmissibility of evi-
dence seized in violation of unreasonable search V. LIABILITIES OF VESSELS AND OWN-
and seizure provision must be raised by objec-
tion. In re Kosopud, 330.

8 (U.S.D.C.III.) Waiver of constitutional
rights must appear by clear and positive testi-
mony.--U. S. v. Kelih. 484.

ERS IN GENERAL.

75 (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Part owner not person-
ally liable for breach of executory contract to
carry cargo made without his authority.-Pet-
ers v. Taulane, 725.