E. Edelmann & Co. v. Triple-A Specialty Co.

88 F.2d 852 (1937)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

E. Edelmann & Co. v. Triple-A Specialty Co.

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
88 F.2d 852 (1937)

  • Written by Heather Whittemore, JD

Facts

E. Edelmann & Co. (Edelmann) (defendant) held a patent for a hydrometer. Triple-A Specialty Co. (Triple-A) (plaintiff) patented a competing hydrometer. Edelmann accused Triple-A of infringing its hydrometer patent and informed the industry of Triple-A’s alleged wrongdoing. Triple-A filed a lawsuit in federal district court, seeking a declaratory judgment that its hydrometer patent did not infringe Edelmann’s patent. Triple-A was able to seek a declaratory judgment because of the Declaratory Judgment Act, a federal law that provided federal courts the ability to hear a controversy between two parties and determine their legal rights without awarding any damages. The district court declared that Triple-A’s patent did not infringe Edelmann’s patent. Edelman appealed, arguing that the district court did not have jurisdiction over the case. Edelmann reasoned that the case arose under equity rather than patent laws. Edelmann further argued that the Declaratory Judgment Act did not confer jurisdiction over the case to the federal court.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Lindley, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 815,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership