From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kaffeman v. Stern

City Court of New York, General Term
May 1, 1898
23 Misc. 599 (N.Y. City Ct. 1898)

Opinion

May, 1898.

Daniel P. Hays, for appellants.

Joseph Kohler, for respondent.


Assuming that "Lissauer and Sondheim" were necessary parties that fact appeared upon the face of the complaint, and the objection should have been taken by demurrer. Not having been so taken it was waived. Code Civ. Pro., § 488, subd. 5, and § 499; Fourth Nat. Bank v. Scott, 31 Hun, 301.

If it had been intended to restrict the licensors from manufacturing under the patent, such a covenant should have been inserted in the agreement.

Furthermore the defendants cannot use the patent and refuse to pay the license fees provided for by the contract. McKay v. Smith, 39 Fed. Repr. 556.

The judgment appealed from should be affirmed, with costs.

McCARTHY, J., concurs.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.


Summaries of

Kaffeman v. Stern

City Court of New York, General Term
May 1, 1898
23 Misc. 599 (N.Y. City Ct. 1898)
Case details for

Kaffeman v. Stern

Case Details

Full title:FREDERICK KAFFEMAN, Respondent, v . LEOPOLD STERN et al., Appellants

Court:City Court of New York, General Term

Date published: May 1, 1898

Citations

23 Misc. 599 (N.Y. City Ct. 1898)

Citing Cases

Wynne v. Allen

So long as one recognizes the right to use a patent and acts thereunder, he is liable for royalties.…