Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Webster Elec. Co. Vs. Splitdorf Elec. Co.

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Apr 07, 1924

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, 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

31 entries 2 linked 29 unlinked
Show
  1. Wollensak Vs. Sargent US Supreme Court · Jan 08, 1894
    Relied / Followed
  2. Chapman Vs. Wintroath US Supreme Court · Mar 01, 1920
  3. Webster Elec. Co. v. Splitdorf
    Search
  4. Elec. Co. - 264 U.S. 463 (1924) U.S. Supreme Court Webster Elec. Co. v. Splitdorf
    Search
  5. Elec. Co., 264 U.S. 463 (1924) Webster Elecctric Company v. Splitdorf
    Search
  6. be proven justifying a longer delay is applicable also to patents issued on divisional applications. Chapman v. Wintroath
    Search
  7. third patent, and we are not called upon to consider the contentions now advanced as to the others. Alice State Bank v. Houston
    Search
  8. whether they were not so materially enlarged as to preclude their allowance on the original application. Railway Co. v. Sayles
    Search
  9. Dunham v. Dennison
    Search
  10. Michigan Cent. R. Co. v. Consolidated
    Search
  11. Bennett v. Fowler
    Search
  12. American Laundry Machinery Co. v. Prosperity
    Search
  13. was applied with great distinctness to the correction of alleged mistakes in patents by reissues in the case of Miller v. Brass
    Search
  14. since, and at the present term has been reconsidered and emphatically repeated as the settled law in the case of Mahn v. Harwood
    Search
  15. In Ives v. Sargent
    Search
  16. allowed, it was held that the patentee was guilty of laches and the reissue came too late. The doctrine of Wollensak v. Reiher
    Search
  17. unless excuse for a longer delay shall be made manifest by the special circumstances of the case. See also Topliff v. Topliff
    Search
  18. case here by certiorari because of the claim that the decision of the court of appeals rested primarily on Chapman v. Wintroath
    Search
  19. But Chapman v. Wintroath
    Search
  20. Reference is made to Wollensak v. Reiher
    Search
  21. American Laundry Machinery Co. v. Prosperity
    Search
  22. U.S. Supreme Court Webster Elec. Co. v. Splitdorf
    Search
  23. Webster Elecctric Company v. Splitdorf
    Search
  24. Alice State Bank v. Houston
    Search
  25. Railway Co. v. Sayles
    Search
  26. of Miller v. Brass
    Search
  27. of Mahn v. Harwood
    Search
  28. of Wollensak v. Reiher
    Search
  29. Hobbs v. Beach
    Search
  30. Wollensak v. Reiher
    Search
  31. Topliff v. Topliff
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial