Brill v. North Jersey St. Ry. Co.

Citations

• 125 F. 526
• 1903 U.S. App. LEXIS 5106

Syllabus

<p>1. Decree—Opening—Newly Discovered Evidence.</p> <p>A defendant applied for the opening of an interlocutory decree, sustaining certain patents and finding infringement, on the ground of newly discovered patents alleged to anticipate or limit those in suit, and for a rehearing of the case after the introduction of such additional patents. Held, that the application must be denied on three independent grounds; first, because it did not appear that any search prior to the hearing was made on the part of the defendant for patents germane or allied to those in suit according to their proper and usual location, arrangement and classification in the patent office; secondly, because it appeared by the admission of the solicitors of the defendant that they had knowledge for more than a week before the signing of the decree of the existence of the alleged newly discovered patents and withheld that knowledge from the court until several days had elapsed after the decree was signed, although both parties by their solicitors were present before the court at the time and had knowledge of the formulation and settlement of the terms of such decree; and, thirdly, because from an examination of the patents sought to be introduced, in connection with the expert and other affidavits and the record of the case, it appeared that those patents were immaterial so far as the result embodied in the decree was concerned.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>