Case Name: DUPRE v. DENISON et al.
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1922-03-27
Citations: 279 F. 1017
Docket Number: No. 236
Parties: DUPRE v. DENISON et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 279
Pages: 1017–1017

Head Matter:
DUPRE v. DENISON et al.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
March 27, 1922.)
No. 236.
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for tho Northern District of New York. Suit in equity by William H. Dupre against Howard P. Denison and the Bowen products corporation. Decree for defendants, and complainant appeals.
Affirmed.
See, also, 262 Fed. 975.
Charles Neave and Stephen H. Philbin, both of New York City, for appellant. Arthur E. Sutherland, of Rochester, N. Y., John Taber, of Auburn, N. Y„ and Eugene A. Thompson, of Syracuse, N. Y., for appellees.
Before HOUGH, MANTON, and MAYER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
No question of law is presented by this appeal. The sole inquiry is whether, as alleged in the answer, Mr. Denison did or did not "purchase the patent mentioned in the complaint for and in consideration of tho sum of $500." Having carefully read the evidence which the trial judge hoard (together with the depositions offered) we agree with him, and find it true that Mr. Denison did purchase the patent referred to for $500, paid for it at once, and that the plaintiff was at the time well satisfied therewith. It is quite true that the purchase was not conducted with much formality, and what was done exposed Mr. Denison to just such an attack as this, which attack, however, has been devised, not by tho plaintiff herein, but by the witness F'esler for purposes of Ms own. As we find no merit in that attack, the decree appealed from is affirmed, with costs.