Volume 283 — Federal Reporter

Action by the Hoosier Veneer Company against Matthew Wilson and others, in which the Trusts & Guarantee Company, Limited, as executor of defendant named, was substituted as defendant. Judgment quashing the attachment and dismissing the suit, and plaintiff brings error.

<p>Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Oklahoma; John H. Cotteral, Judge.</p> <p>Suit by Russell H. Clark against Fred Varner and another. Decree for complainant, and defendants appeal.</p>

<p>1. Removal of causes <@=>10 — Federal court has no jurisdiction, unless state court had jurisdiction.</p> <p>A federal court has no jurisdiction of a case removed from a state court, unless the state court from which it was removed had jurisdiction of the subject-matter of the suit.</p> <p>2. Master and servant <@=>396 — Removal of causes <@=>10 — Oklahoma district court without jurisdiction of claim under Workmen’s Compensation Act.</p> <p>Under Workmen’s Compensation Act Okl. art. 2, §§ 10 and 13, and article 6, § 2, as amended by Laws 1919, e. 14, § 14, the Industrial Commission has jurisdiction, exclusive of state district court, of a claim for injuries from negligent malpractice of a surgeon furnished by the employer; and, since the state district court has no jurisdiction, the federal District Court has none on removal from the state court.</p>

<p>Petition to Revise Order of the District Court of the United States for the District of North Dakota.</p> <p>Proceeding between Edward H. Schrepel and C. B. Davis, as trustee in bankruptcy of D. W. Cook, bankrupt. An order was made directing Schrepel to turn oves money to the trustee, and he brings a petition to revise.</p>

<p>Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Nebraska; Joseph W. Woodrough, Judge.</p> <p>Suit in equity by E. E. Closson, as trustee in bankruptcy for the National Potash Corporation, against Newberry’s Hardware Company. Decree for defendant, and complainant appeals.</p>

<p>In Error to the District Court of the United States for the District of Indiana.</p> <p>Criminal prosecution by the United States against Fred Ossenberg. Judgment of conviction, and defendant brings error.</p>

<p>Appeals from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Illinois. V</p> <p>Creditors’ bill against the Southern Traction Company. Receivers were appointed for the company, and intervening bills and petitions were filed by certain creditors, involving controversies between the Union Trust & Savings Bank, trustee, and others, and the Southern Traction Company and others, between John A. Hamilton, trustee, and others, and the Southern Traction Company of Illinois and others, between the Kenwood Bridge Company and Jared Y. Sanders and others, between the Marquette National Fire Insurance Company and Jared Y. Sanders and others, between the Naugle Pole & Tie Company and Jared Y. Sanders and others, between the Western Electric Company and Jared Y. Sanders and others, between the Kansas City Bridge Company and Jared Y. Sanders and others, between the Myers Construction Company and Jared Y. Sanders and others, and between Philip Gruner & Bros. Lumber Company and Jared Y. Sanders and others. From the decree rendered, the Union Trust & Savings Bank, trustee, and others, John A. Hamilton, trustee, and others, the Ken-wood Bridge Company, the Marquette National Fire Insurance Company, the Naugle Pole & Tie Company, the Western Electric Company, the Kansas City Bridge-Company, the Myers Construction Company, and the Philip Gruner & Bros. Lumber Company separately appeal.</p>

Suit by the Whiting Manufacturing Company against the Alvin Silver Company, Inc. From a decree for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded, with directions.

<p>Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois.</p> <p>Suit in equity by the Webster Electric Company against the Splitdorf Electrical Company.</p>

Two actions by the International Banking Corporation against the Irving National Bank. Judgment for defendant, after trial with jury waived under Rev. St. § 649, being Comp. St. § 1587 (274 Fed. 122), and plaintiff brings error.

<p>In Equity. Suit by James Oliver Curwood against the Affiliated Distributors, Inc., and others.</p>

<p>In Equity. Suit by W. L. Slayton & Co. against Panola County, Tex., with which was consolidated a suit by the county against said company" and others.</p>

<p>At Law. Action by J. E. Petty '& Co., Incorporated, trading as.the Lebanon'Boiler Works, against the Dock Contractor Company, a corporation. On rule to strike off return of service. Rule made absolute.</p>

Petition for Review under Section 24b of the Bankruptcy Act (Comp. St. § 9608) and Appeal from the 'District Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Illinois. In the matter of Wilson E. Henderson, bankrupt; E. H. Johnson, trustee. Petition to revise and appeal by the Board of Trade of the City of Chicago and others from an order of the District Court.

Suit by Cantrell & Cochrane, Limited, against the Hygeia Distilled Water Company, Inc., for an injunction restraining defendant from using a certain label on receptacles containing defendant’s ginger ale. From a decree awarding the injunction prayed for, defendant appeals.

Petition to Review and Revise Orders of the District Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Illinois. In the matter of Harrison Parker, N. A. Hawkenson, and John Coe, alleged bankrupts, wherein William- Plartman and others ask for an adjudication in bankruptcy. On petition of alleged bankrupts td re- ' vise order (275 Fed. 868) of the District Court.

<p>In Equity. Suit by the Dakota Coal Company and the McClure Coal Company against G. A. Fraser, individually and as Adjutant General of the state of North Dakota, and others. On motion for preliminary injunction.</p>

<p>1. Seamen <§=>25 — Signing release not consent’ to unlawful discharge.</p> <p>The release signed before a shipping commissioner by discharged seamen on settlement of their wages for the time served, required by Rev. St. § 4552 (Comp. St. § 8341), does not operate as a consent to their unlawful discharge.</p> <p>2. Seamen <§=>19 — Discharge “before commencement of voyage.”</p> <p>Where seamen, who signed for a voyage, were discharged without their consent or fault, not having served a month and the voyage not having commenced, Rev. St. § 4527 (Comp. St. § 8318), which entitles them, when, so discharged “before the commencement of the voyage,” to an additional month’s wages, applies, though the voyage was abandoned.</p> <p>3. Seamen <§=>25 — Release signed by seamen set aside; “good cause.”</p> <p>Rev. St. § 4552 (Comp. St. § 8341), provides that a release signed by a-seaman thereunder on receipt of wages “shall operate as a mutual discharge and settlement of all demands for wages.” Seamen’s Act March 4, 1915, § 4 (Comp. St. § 8322), provides that the court “may upon good' cause shown set aside such release and take such action as justice shall' require.” Held that, where seamen, discharged without their consent or fault before commencement of the voyage, who were entitled under Rev. St. § 4527 (Comp. St. § 8318), to an additional month’s wages, were compelled to sign such a release to obtain payment of the wages admittedly due them, the release would be set aside and held not a bar to their recovery under section 4527.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other definitions, see Words and Phrases, First and’ Second Series, Good Cause.]</p>

<p>1. Clerks of courts <@=>54 — Entitled to commission on bonds deposited as bail.</p> <p>Under Rev. St. § 828 (Comp. St. § 1383), the clerk of a District Court must charge a commission of 1 per cent, on the par value of Liberty Bonds deposited as bail.</p> <p>2. Clerks of courts <@=>54 — Not authorized to charge commission on costs paid.</p> <p>A clerk of the District Court is not authorized to charge an additional 1 per cent, on costs paid in civil and criminal cases as a commission.</p> <p>3. Clerks of courts <^=54< — Not authorized to charge commission to defendant on' fine paid.</p> <p>The clerk of a District Court helé not authorized to add 1 per cent, to a fine imposed on a defendant as a commission, in view of the practice in force in the district for many years, of not charging a< commission on money collected as fines.</p>

<p>In Equity. Suit by the Jackson-Walker Coal & Material Company against George H. Hodges and others. On final hearing.</p>

<p>At Law. Separate actions by the Prince Line, Limited, and the American Hawaiian Steamship Company against the United States.</p>

<p>In Equity. Suit by the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District against J. B. Bond, Project Manager of Boise Project of the United States Reclamation Service, in which the Payette-Boise Water Users’ Association, Limited, intervene. On motion to dismiss complaint.</p>

<p>Proceeding by the Alabama Power Company against the Gulf Power Company and others to condemn lands of riparian owners under Federal Water Power Act, § 21. On plea in abatement on the ground of the pendency of a prior suit for similar purpose in the probate court of Coosa county, Ala., and plea challenging the constitutionality of such act.</p>

<p>Courts <©=>334 — Condemnation suits by United States to conform to general state procedure.</p> <p>Under Act Aug. 1, 1888, § 2 (Comp. St. § 6910), providing that condemnation proceedings by the United States shall conform, as near as may be, to the procedure in the state courts “in like causes,” the procedure to be followed is that established by state statute in condemnation proceedings generally, and a federal court is not authorized to adopt a procedure specially provided by a state statute for proceedings by the United States, which is less favorable to the property owner, over his timely objection.</p>

<p>At Law. Action by the Buffalo Union Furnace Company against the United States Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corporation to recover on contract.</p>

<p>In Bankruptcy. In the matter of the Boulder Milling & Elevator Company, alleged bankrupt. On motion to dismiss amended petition.</p>

<p>Criminal prosecution by the United States against George Remus . and others. On motion to quash and demurrer to indictment.</p>

<p>At Raw. Action by the American Express Company against Daniel P. Sweeney and others.</p>

<p>1. Patents <3=214 — Cancellation! of royalty contract held obtained by fraud of licensee.</p> <p>Cancellation of a royalty contract, under which contract licensees were to manufacture, with exclusive right from licensors, tractors pursuant to the then unpatented design of licensors, paying a specified royalty, and were hound to pay the same royalty if in any way interested in the manufacture of any other tractor embodying any of the distinguishing features of licensors’ design, held procured by fraud, and so properly sot aside, and the contract restored; licensees having secretly and fraudulently obtained interfering patents, and falsely represented that their company was insolvent, and that they did not intend to continue manufacturing.</p> <p>2. Patents <S=2t4 — Suit to set aside caiiceilatlon of royalty contract aesd for accounting held properly dismissed against subsequently formed corporation.</p> <p>Suit by licensors to set aside cancellation of a royalty contract obtained by licensees by fraud, and to restore the contract, and for accounting, held properly dismissed as against a corporation formed, after the cancellation, by consolidation with another company of the corporation originally organized by licensees to manufacture tractors pursuant to licensors’ then unpatented design.</p> <p>3. Patents <3=214 — Both licensees held liable for royalties on setting aside of fraudulent cancellation of contract.</p> <p>One of two licensees for manufacturing tractors pursuant to licensors’ then unpatented design having participated in the fraud through which cancellation of their license and contract to pay royalty was obtained, and thereafter accepted without protest the benefits of the fraud of the other, to whom he had left the conduct of business of 'the corporation formed for the manufacture of infringing tractors, should, on the cancellation being set aside, he held equally liable with the other for royalties.</p>

Lawrence Groner, Judge. Libel by C. C. Branch against the Merchants' & Miners' Transportation Company and the United States, as owner of the steamship Lake Fabyan. Decree for libelant, and respondents appeal.

<p>In Equity. Suit by Harvey Hubbell, Inc., against the Fitzgerald Manufacturing Company.</p>

<p>In Bankruptcy. In the matter of E. E. Martin, bankrupt. On review of an order of the referee.</p>

<p>At Law. Action by M. J. Brandenstein & Co. against Nicolas Castaño. On motion by defendant to increase plaintiffs’ attachment bond.</p>

<p>1. Patents <§=»328 — -1,071,027, fop mailing ice cream cones, held not infringed.</p> <p>Claims for suheombinations under Bruckman patent, No. 1,071,027, for machine for making ice cream cones, held not infringed; and the patent itself held not a pioneer and revolutionary invention.</p> <p>2. Patents <®=»328 — -1,071,027, for machine for making ice cream cones, held anticipated in part.</p> <p>The Bruckman patent, No. 1,071,027, for machine for making ice cream cones, held anticipated, as respects the extraction function of the core used in molding the cones, by Brookfield & Stivers patent, No. 835,285, although the latter patent refers to glass molding, as glass molding is an analogous art with pastry molding.</p>

<p>Petition to Review Order of Federal Trade Commission. Petition by the Mishawaka Woolen Manufacturing Company to review an order of the Federal Trade Commission.</p>