Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

BRAGG-KLIESRATH CORP. v. WALTER S. VOGEL & CO.

DISTRICT COURT, E.D. NEW YORK


May 22, 1933

BRAGG-KLIESRATH CORPORATION
v.
WALTER S. VOGEL & CO., Inc.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: CAMPBELL

CAMPBELL, District Judge.

On Motion for Order Staying Issuance of Injunction.

Defendant moves for an order staying the issuance of the injunction provided for in the decree herein and further proceedings during the pendency of an appeal to be taken herein.

 There is no showing that any possible damage was come to the defendant by the granting of the injunction, as it is not the manufacturer but only a seller of the manufactured article in very small quantities, some time since, and it appears by the affidavit of John A. Haag, treasurer of Fink, Dumont, White, Inc., the company which sold valves and chambers to the defendant, that he does not know where said Walter S. Vogel now is.

 The only purpose in seeking the stay, that I can see, is to use that stay as an argument against the granting of a preliminary injunction in cases against the alleged infringers that plaintiff may institute.

 Any bond that might be required or given in this case would not be of any protection to the plaintiff in view of the very small sales made or anticipated by the defendant, but there are others who will probably make large sales, such as the distributors, and any bond given in this case will be no protection to plaintiff against such sales.

 Any claim made herein that damage will come to Lathan Company, Inc., by the granting of the injunction herein cannot properly be urged here, as that company is not a party to this suit, nor did it come in and defend, nor would plaintiff by any bond given herein be protected against any sales made by said Lathan Company, Inc.

 Had that company come in and announced that it assumed the defense of this suit, and been bound by the decree, a very different question would have been presented, if it was sought to stay the injunction.

 Motion denied.

19330522

© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.