Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Charlotte S. Wilder et al., Respondents, v. John G. Stearns, impleaded, etc., Appellant, 1871 — 48 N.Y. 656 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Charlotte S. Wilder et al., Respondents, v. John G. Stearns, impleaded, etc., Appellant
48 N.Y. 656·New York Commission of Appeals·1871·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Charlotte S. Wilder et al., Respondents, v. John G. Stearns, impleaded, etc., Appellant.
(Argued May 15, 1871;
decided September term, 1871.)
B. G. Wilder, the owner of a patent for improvement in safes, transferred the same to defendants upon their agreement to pay three-fourths of a cent per pound on weights of all safes sold by them during the term of the contract. Also, that in case of renewal they should have the same right upon the same terms. Before the expiration of the original patent, defendant Roff assigned to Stearns. The patent was renewed for seven years. After the renewal the safes were manufactured by Stearns ,& Marvin. On the 1st November, 1860, Stearns sold out to Marvin, and delivered possession of the stock of safes on hand, amounting to 837,148 pounds. Upon this amount plaintiffs, as assignees of Wilder, claimed the royalty. Heldy that as Marvin was not, as far as the patentee was concerned, a partner in the manufacture of the safes, the manufacture and sale by the firm of Stearns & Marvin being only protected by the license to Stearns; whenever the safes manufactured passed from the authority and control of Stearns, the license was at an end, and the rights of the patentee terminated. The transfer was, therefore, a sale within the meaning of the contract, and defendant Stearns liable for the royalty.
Wm. M. Eoarts for the appellant.
J. M. Van Gott for the respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Hurt, C., reads for affirmance.
All concur, except Earl, C., dissenting. Judgment affirmed.