Summary

Pierce Butler Keystone Driller Company v. General Excavator Company…

But courts of equity do not make the quality of suitors the test. They apply the maxim requiring clean hands only where some unconscionable act of one coming for relief has immediate and necessary relation to the equity that he seeks in respect of the matter in litigation. They do not close their doors because of plaintiff's misconduct, whatever its character, that has no relation to anything involved in the suit, but only for such violations of conscience as in some measure affect the equitable relations between the parties in respect of something brought before the court for adjudication.
Source: Wikisource

Pierce Butler Keystone Driller Company v. General Excavator Company…

Had the corruption of Clutter been disclosed at the trial of the Byers Case, the court undoubtedly would have been warranted ranted in holding it sufficient to require dismissal of the cause of action there alleged for the infringement of the Downie patent. Promptly after the decision in that case plaintiff brought these suits and immediately applied for injunctions pendente lite. It used the decree of validity there obtained in support, if not indeed as the basis, of its applications.
Source: Wikisource

Pierce Butler Keystone Driller Company v. General Excavator Company…

The question presented is whether the Circuit Court of Appeals rightly applied the maxim, He who comes into equity must come with clean hands.
Petitioner owns five patents which may be conveniently identified as the Clutter patent and the four Downie patents. [1] They all cover devices constituting parts of a ditching machine operated on the principle of a mechannical hoe or mattock. The Clutter patent is basic and the Downie patents are for claimed improvements.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature