The Legal News Volume 4 (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1881 Excerpt: ...to pay quarterly on the first of May, August, November and February (first payment due 1st August, 1880), with attested accounts of sales each quarter. The $100, balance of 1st February, 1881, is unpaid, and the plaintiff alleges that the defendants have failed to pay all else, and to render accounts each quarter as they were bound to do; that they have not kept the market supplied, and have not pushed sales, but have been negligent, and have thus damaged plaintiff to the extent of $50. The conclusions are for the sum of $150, and that the defendants be condemned to render a full account of all their sales and doings, or, in default of an account, that they be condemned to pay a further sum of $500 as damages. The plea is to the effect that plaintiff falsely pretended that his churn was a new and useful invention, and that its principle was new, whereas it is not new, and the churn does not perform its work in any way to fulfil what the plaintiff represented about it, and is not a new and useful invention; that the plaintiff was to defend the defendants selling said churn, but instead of doing so has allowed others to make and sell churns of like principle, although the defendants duly notified the plaintiff of what was going on; that the "Baldwin figure 8 churn" has been openly sold in competition with plaintiffs so-called invention and works upon like principle as plaintiffs patented churn, but the plaintiff has never taken steps to prosecute those selling the Baldwin churn; that the Baldwin is a superior churn, and prevents the sale of plaintiffs, in consequence; that plaintiff gave the defendants the exclusive right to sell but had been selling, contrary to his agreement, churns manufactured by himself in the city of Montreal; that defendants ...