Sinclair Refining Co. v. Jenkins Petroleum Process Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that interlocutory judgments are unknown in jury trials and the “answer being general, the case according to common-law practice must be tried as a unit and not broken into parts”
• granting discovery as to the defendant’s post-breach use of the plaintiff’s patent for the purpose of proving lost profits
• allowing evidence of the actual profits gained from defendant’s post-breach use of the plaintiffs device for purposes of proving damages
• referring to later experiences as a “book of wisdom” which can correct uncertainties present at the time of hypothetical negotiation
• referring to later experiences as a “book of wisdom” which can correct uncertainties present at the time of negotiation
• referring to post- infringement factual developments in a patent case as “a book of wisdom that courts may not neglect”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).