Summary

Seim v. Hurd — Opinion of the Court

None of the questions certified is apposite to the facts as we understand the certificate to state them. It may have been the intention by the use of the words 'infringing tires' in the first, second, and third questions to refer to the rubber stock only. It seems to be conceded in the arguments of both parties that the rubber alone is made by the Kokomo Company.
Source: Wikisource

Seim v. Hurd — Opinion of the Court

Hurd, decided this day [ [ [232 U.S. 428] ] , 58 L. ed. --, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 409] , but it is not presented by the facts of the present case. There is no suggestion that the defendants here purchased the various parts and sold them to be assembled by their customers, but, on the contrary, as we have said, the defendants made the structure themselves.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature