Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

35 Tex. 556

Stone v. Edwards

Texas Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1872

Texas Supreme Court · decided 1872-07-01

<p>Appeal from Marion. Tried below before the Hon. J. D. McAdoo.</p> <p>The opinion states all material facts.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently February 1914

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1872-07-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Walker, J.

¶1The only question before us for adjudication in this case is, had the State courts jurisdiction in actions to enjoin, or to recover damages for the infringment of a patent right? Article 1, Section 8, of the Constitution of the United States provides : “The Congress shall have power to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to .authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.”

¶2The judicial power to enforce this provision of the Constitution is vested exclusively in the Federal courts. (Art. 3, § 2, Con. U. S; Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee, 1 Wh. R. 304 (Condensed Reports, Vol. 3, p. 558, et seq.) Cohen v. Virginia, 6 Wh. R., 264 (Condensed Reports, Vol. 5, p. 110); The Act of July, 1836, Ch. 367, § 17, Vol. 5, p. 124; Whitman’s Patent Laws, § 55, p. 24.)

¶3Stone, the plaintiff in the action, is the assignee of Filley. Filley is the patentee of the Charter Oak Cooking Stove. Stone took by assignment the exclusive right to vend the stove within certain territorial limits, which include the county of Marion. Edwards is no doubt a trespasser upon the rights of Stone, and may be enjoined from further trespassing, and perhaps condemned in damages for trespasses already committed. But Stone must bring his action in the proper court.

¶4The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

¶5Affirmed.

/35/tex/556 · .json · Public domain