Deering, Milliken & Co., Inc. v. Joseph Gilbert, Individually and Doing Business as Gilbert Textile Company

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• computing plaintiffs actual damages by assessing defendant’s profits, as “measured by plaintiffs minimum license fee which the defendant by its infringement had ‘saved.’ ”
• allowing recovery when defendant was evasive, was “unworthy of belief,” and produced no evidence of sales
• expressing approval, in theory, of trebling defendant’s profits “[especially in view of the deliberate and fraudulent nature of the infringement”, but treating district court’s award as based on plaintiffs damages
• where ... the defendant controls the most satisfactory evidence of sales the plaintiff need only establish a basis for a reasoned conclusion as to the extent of injury caused by the deliberate and wrongful infringement.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).