Skip to main content
· 3/31/1913

Lubin Manufacturing Co. v. Swaab

Citations

  • 240 Pa. 182
  • 87 A. 597
  • 1913 Pa. LEXIS 649

Syllabus

<p>Replevin — Evidence—Relevancy—Cross-examination — Binding instructions — Damages—Premature issuance of writ — Nominal damages — Instructions to jury — Exemplary damages.</p> <p>1. In an action of replevin to recover certain moving picture films leased to defendant by the plaintiff it appeared that both parties were licensed by the owners of the patents upon the films, the plaintiff to manufacture and lease films to licensed exchanges, the defendant to operate such exchange to sub-let films to licensed exhibitors; that the contract between the patentee and the defendant provided that should the agreement be terminated by the licensor for any breach of condition, the right to possession of all licensed films would twenty days after notice of such termination revert to the licensed manufacturers from whom they had been obtained, and that the pictures should be returned to such manufacturers, “at once after the expiration of that period’’; that each motion picture sought to be recovered was delivered to the defendant in a box containing a label with the condition printed thereon, that the licensee only had the. right to sub-let the motion picture contained in the box while his; license agreement with the patentee remained in effect, and that violation of the condition would entitle the licensor “to immediate possession of this motion picture” ; that a written notice of cancellation of defendant’s license was given by the patentee for violation of the terms of the defendant’s license agreement; and that the writ of replevin was issued one ■day before the expiration of the twenty day period. Plaintiff claimed to recover upon an alleged breach of the condition of the label contract entitling it to immediate possession of the films without waiting for the expiration of the twenty day period, but-, did not prove beyond controversy that the defendant had sub-let any licensed films after the annulment of his authority so to do, or that films admitted by defendant’s witnesse

Judges: Brown, Fell, Mestrezat, Moschzisker, Potter

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.