From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Day-Brite Lighting v. Ruby Lighting Corp.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 9, 1951
191 F.2d 521 (9th Cir. 1951)

Opinion

No. 12633.

August 9, 1951.

Carr Carr Gravely, Joseph J. Gravely, St. Louis, Mo., Harris, Kiech, Foster Harris, Ward D. Foster, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellant.

C.A. Miketta and W.W. Glenny, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee.

Before DENMAN, Chief Judge, HEALY, Circuit Judge, and GOODMAN, District Judge.


The judgment is affirmed on the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the district court, except as to the judgment for attorneys' fees. There is no showing or finding of unfairness or bad faith in the conduct of the losing party nor any other equitable consideration of similar force which makes it grossly unfair that the winner of this lawsuit be left to bear the burden of his own counsel fees which prevailing litigants normally bear, to bring the award within the discretionary power conferred in 35 U.S.C.A. § 70. Park-In-Theatres, Inc. v. Perkins, 9 Cir., 190 F.2d 137.

The judgment is reversed in so far as it awards attorneys' fees in the sum of $3,000.


Summaries of

Day-Brite Lighting v. Ruby Lighting Corp.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 9, 1951
191 F.2d 521 (9th Cir. 1951)
Case details for

Day-Brite Lighting v. Ruby Lighting Corp.

Case Details

Full title:DAY-BRITE LIGHTING, Inc. v. RUBY LIGHTING CORP

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Aug 9, 1951

Citations

191 F.2d 521 (9th Cir. 1951)

Citing Cases

Crown Mach. & Tool Co. v. KVP-Sutherland Paper Co.

This Court believes that the instant suit falls within those cases deemed "exceptional" by Sec. 285, and that…

Talon, Inc. v. Union Slide Fastener, Inc.

We hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorney's fees to Union. Day-Brite…