Joseph P. Bradley, Thomson v. Wooster — Opinion of the Court
“ At all events, the court cannot say, as mere matter of law, that this might not have been the case.We think that the objection to the decree going to the validity of the patent and the whole cause of action cannot be sustained. ”
Joseph P. Bradley, Thomson v. Wooster — Opinion of the Court
“ Was it from a knowledge of the fact that the persons who folded such strips were infringing the complainant's patent, and a consequent unwillingness to become further complicated in such infringements? At all events, since the defendants chose to make their own folded strips in their own factory, instead of going outside to purchase them, or have them made by others, they cannot justly complain of being accountable for the profits realized in using the complainant's machine for that purpose. ”
Joseph P. Bradley, Thomson v. Wooster — Opinion of the Court
“ When a person appears and departs without answering, and the whole process of the court has been awarded against him after his appearance and departure, to the sequestration; there also the bill is taken pro confesso, because it is presumed to be true when he has appeared, and departs in despite of the court, and withstands all its process without answering.' Forum Romanum, 36. Lord HARDWICKE likened a decree pro confesso to a judgment by nil dicit at common law, and to judgment for plaintiff on demurrer to the defendant's plea. ”
