Leman v. Krentler-Arnold Hinge Last Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a district court’s decree is binding “throughout the United States”
• holding that a district court's decree is binding \throughout the United States\
• holding that a plaintiff “submit[s] itself to the jurisdiction of the court with respect to all the issues embraced in the suit, including those pertaining to the counterclaim of the defendants.”
• permitting the recovery of profits from a patent infringement in violation of a court order even though the patentee could not show damages resulting from the infringement
• holding, in a patent case, that “[w]hen the [plaintiff] brought the suit in [federal district court], it submitted itself to the jurisdiction of the court with respect to all the issues embraced in the suit, including those pertaining to the counterclaim of the defendants”
• explaining that when a party brings a suit in federal district court, “it submit[s] itself to the jurisdiction of the [C]ourt with respect to all the issues embraced in the suit, including those pertaining to the counterclaim of the defendants”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).