Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Ryder Vs. Holt

Ryder vs Holt

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Dec-10-1888
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/85800

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
128 U.S. 525
Subject
Intellectual Property

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Intellectual Property

Key legal issue
Intellectual Property

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ryder

Respondent

Holt

Excerpt

ryder v. holt - 128 u.s. 525 (1888) u.s. supreme court ryder v. holt, 128 u.s. 525 (1888) ryder v. holt no. 76 argued november 14, 1888 decided december 10, 1888 128 u.s. 525 appeal from the circuit court of the united states for the southern district of new york syllabus a circuit court of the united states has no jurisdiction over suits for the violation of a trademark if the plaintiff and defendant are citizens of the same state and the bill fails to allege that the trademark in controversy was used on goods intended to be transported to a foreign country. the case is stated in the opinion of the court. mr. chief justice fuller delivered the opinion of the court. it was stipulated in the circuit court that this cause should abide the event of menendez v. holt, ante, 128 u. s. 514 , just decided, and the same decree in favor of complainants was therefore rendered in this as in that case. but it is now assigned for error that as defendant and complainants below were citizens of the same state, and the bill did not allege that the trademark in controversy was "used on goods intended to be transported to a foreign country," act of march 3, 1881, c. 138, § 11, 21 stat. 502, the circuit court had no jurisdiction and the decree must be reversed for that reason. the objection is well taken, and the decree is accordingly reversed.

Full Judgment

Ryder v. Holt - 128 U.S. 525 (1888)
U.S. Supreme Court Ryder v. Holt, 128 U.S. 525 (1888)

Ryder v. Holt

No. 76

Argued November 14, 1888

Decided December 10, 1888

128 U.S. 525

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED

STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

SYLLABUS

A circuit court of the United States has no jurisdiction over suits for the violation of a trademark if the plaintiff and defendant are citizens of the same state and the bill fails to allege that the trademark in controversy was used on goods intended to be transported to a foreign country.

The case is stated in the opinion of the Court.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE FULLER delivered the opinion of the Court.

It was stipulated in the circuit court that this cause should abide the event of Menendez v. Holt, ante, 128 U. S. 514 , just decided, and the same decree in favor of complainants was therefore rendered in this as in that case. But it is now assigned for error that as defendant and complainants below were citizens of the same state, and the bill did not allege that the trademark in controversy was "used on goods intended to be transported to a foreign country," Act of March 3, 1881, c. 138, § 11, 21 Stat. 502, the circuit court had no jurisdiction and the decree must be reversed for that reason. The objection is well taken, and the decree is accordingly

Reversed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial