Case ID: ny_225/html/0676-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The Comerma Company, Appellant, v. John Comerma et al., Respondents.
    
      Comerma Co. v. Comerma, 182 App. Div. 576, affirmed.
    (Submitted January 8, 1919;
    decided January 28, 1919.)
    Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial • department, entered July 15, 1918, modifying and affirming as modified a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. The judgment enjoined the defendants from engaging in the construction of structures of flat tile and the class of tile work known as “ Guastavino Arches,” “ Spanish Tile Arches,” “ Cohesive Tile Arches,” “ Timbrel Vaults,” “ Timbrel Tile Construction ” or “ Comerma Tile Arches,” from making, using or vending any construction described in United States letters patent No. 947,177 issued January 18, 1910, to R. Guastavino, for improvements in masonry structures, which cover a certain type of masonry arch, and from making, using or vending any construction described in United States letters patent No. 1,119,543, issued December 1, 1914, to W. C. Sabine and R. Guastavino for a type of acoustic material for walls and ceilings, and adjudged that the plaintiff recover against defendants damages received by them as profits upon such prohibited , structures built by them. The Appellate Division, while leaving in the judgment the provision that the defendants were restrained from violating the contract of February 23, 1915, and from engaging in the construction of “ Guastavino Arches,” “ Spanish Tile Arches,” “ Cohesive Tile Arches,” “ Timbrel Vaults, ” “ Timbrel Tile Construction ” and “ Comerma Tile Arches,” struck out the provision in the judgment of the Special Term which enjoined the defendants from building the structures described in the two patents, and reduced the money judgment by eliminating damages with regard to these.
    
      Edward H. Wilson for appellant.
    
      Frederick B. Byan and Boderic Wellman for respondents.
   Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Chase, Hogan, Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin and Andrews, JJ.