DEAN V. MASON, 61 U. S. 198 (1857)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 61 U. S. 198

U.S. Supreme Court

Dean v. Mason, 61 U.S. 20 How. 198 198 (1857)

Dean v. Mason

61 U.S. (20 How.) 198


In suits for the infringement of a patent right, the rule of damages is the amount which the infringer actually realized in profits, not what he might have made by reasonable diligence.

After a bill is taken pro confesso in the circuit court, a motion to allow an answer to be filed is addressed to the discretion of the court, and from a refusal so to do an appeal does not lie to this Court.

A motion to dismiss the complainant's bill upon the ground that he had parted with his interest was properly overruled, because such assignment was not made until after the time when the computation of profits ended.

Page 61 U. S. 199

The bill was filed by Nathan Mason of the City of Providence, in the District of Rhode Island, planer of boards; Charles D. Gould, of Albany, in the State of New York; William W. Woodworth, of Hyde Park, in the Northern District of New York, as he is administrator of William Woodworth, late of the City of New York, gentleman, deceased, and as he is grantee of certain exclusive privileges under and pursuant to an act of Congress, as is hereinafter fully set forth; James G. Wilson, formerly of the City of Philadelphia, and now of Hastings, in the State of New York, gentleman; and Richard Borden, and Jefferson Borden, both of the Town of Fall River and District of Massachusetts, against Dean, of the City of Providence.

The facts of the case are stated in the opinion of the court.

Page 61 U. S. 202

ChanRobles Legal Resources:

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review :

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line :