Court Opinion

ID: 8310112
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-10-17 13:47:15.039646+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:44:41.661319
License: Public Domain

Treat, J.
The bill alleges that the Underwood patent was issued to Underwood, Warren, and March, each one-third interest. It also avers sundry transactions between the respective parties, wliereby said Warren and March conveyed all their interest therein to plaintiff for full consideration. This court, at its last term, examined at length all of the points substantially involved,2 and. held that the respective parties defendant were estopped from disputing the validity of plaintiff’s right.
The exceptions, without resort to verbal criticism, are directed to the question of estoppel, and, under the allegations of the bill and answer with respect thereto, the ruling of this court, in the light of authorities there cited, must prevail, and the exceptions be sustained.

 See Rumsey v. Buck, 20 Fed. Rep. 697.