For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER

III. PERSONS ENTITLED TO PATENTS.

91(4) (D.C.) Evidence held to show prior-
ity of conception by senior applicant.-Oakley
v. Roberts, 279.

91 (4) (D.C.) Evidence held to show rea-
sonable diligence in reducing invention to prac-
tice. Wayne v. Tew, 311.

not

238 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Infringement
avoided by omission of separable part, to be
supplied by purchaser.-American Can Co. v.
Goldee Mfg. Co., 523.
246 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Omission of element of
combination avoids infringement.-Nagy v. In-
ternational Cork Co., 223.

91(4) (D.C.) Evidence held not to show246 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) For combination not
prior reduction to practice by junior party.-bott Coin Counter Co. v. Standard-Johnson
infringed, when material element omitted.-Ab-
Fageol v. Lyon, 336.
Co., 418.

92 (U.S.C.C.A.N.J.) Cannot be granted to
one of two joint inventors.-Joseph Ross & Co.
v. Wigder, 788.

IV. APPLICATIONS AND PROCEEDINGS

THEREON.

99 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) "Disclosure" is

(C) Suits in Equity.

287 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Only profits received
by infringer can be recovered.-International
Radio Telegraph Co. v. Atlantic Communication
Co., 698.
the

specification.-Westinghouse Electric & Mfg.
Co. v. Metropolitan Electric Mfg. Co., 661.
"Man skilled in the art."-Id.

by seizing property of one.-Id.
Profits of all infringers cannot be recovered

Traffic agreement by infringer with control-
101 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) "Claim" is a defini-ling corporation held valid; profits from in-
tion of that which has been disclosed in the fringement of patents limited to percentages
specification.-Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. retained by infringer.-Id.
Co. v. Metropolitan Electric Mfg. Co., 661.
Claims must be supported by specifications,
-Id.

109 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Additional allega-
tions of fact in disclosure need supplemental
oath.-Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v.
Metropolitan Electric Mfg. Co., 661.

Joint infringers are jointly and severally li-
able for all damages.-Id.

Parties conspiring to infringe are not liable
for profits made by all.-Id.

barred by laches.-Universal Arch Co. v. Ameri-
289 (U.S.C.C.A.III.) Suit for infringement
can Arch Co., 647.

112(1) (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Presumed that in-289 (U.S.C.C.A.Wis.) Suit for infringement
vention does not infringe earlier patent.-Ab- held not barred by laches.-U. S. Fire Escape
bott Coin Counter Co. v. Standard-Johnson Counterbalance Co. v. Wisconsin Iron & Wire
Co., 418.
Works, 171.

112(2) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Recitals conclu-294 (U.S.C.C.A.I.) Intention to apply for
sive evidence of taking necessary or statutory writ of review of decision sustaining patent
oaths.-Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v. Supports discretion in denying temporary in-
Metropolitan Electric Mfg. Co., 661.
junction against new infringement.-U. S. Gyp-
sum Co. v. Bestwall Mfg. Co., 800.

112(3) (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Failure of Patent
Office to consider pertinent references weakens
presumption of validity.-American Can Co. v.
Goldee Mfg. Co.. 523.

114 (U.S.D.C.Del.) Decision of Court of
Appeals of District of Columbia in interference
proceeding not conclusive of patentability.-
Victor Talking Mach. Co. v. Brunswick-Balke-
Collender Co., 565.

294 (U.S.C.C.A.Wis.) Order for prelimi-
nary injunction not abuse of discretion, where
unfair competition shown.-Milwaukee Printing
Co. v. Stover, 387.

297(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Wis.) Preliminary in-
junction in infringement suit authorized, where
denial would be injustice.-Milwaukee Print-
ing Co. v. Stover, 387.

297 (2) (U.S.D.C.R.I.) Previous adjudica-

IX. CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF tions held to establish validity on application

LETTERS PATENT.

(A) In General.

157(1) (U. S. C. C. A. Cal.) Meaning given
doubtful claims by patentee may aid in their
construction.-Lorraine v. Townsend, 54.

(B) Limitation of Claims.

for preliminary injunction.-General Electric
Co. v. Brite-Lite Lamp Co., 967.

297 (7) (U.S.D.C.R.I.) Alleged new matter
held not to lessen weight of prior adjudications
of validity.-General Electric Co. v. Brite-Lite
Lamp Co., 967.

303 (U.S.C.C.A.III.) Refusal of preliminary
injunction against new infringement, not asked
until one year after supplemental bill was filed,
held not abuse of discretion.-U. S. Gypsum Co.
Bestwall Mfg. Co., 800.

172 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) One not pioneer held
limited to particular structures described as
elements.-Abbott Coin Counter Co. v. Stand-v.
ard-Johnson Co., 418.

178 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) One not pioneer has
only limited range of equivalents.-Abbott Coin
Counter Co. v. Standard-Johnson Co., 418.

XII. INFRINGEMENT.

show authorized agreement to give license.-
303 (U.S.D.C.R.I.) Evidence held not to
General Electric Co. v. Brite-Lite Lamp Co.,

967.

305 (U.S.D.C.R.I.) Preliminary injunction
granted, with suspension on condition pending
outcome of other litigation.-General Electric
Co. v. Brite-Lite Lamp Co., 967.

(A) What Constitutes Infringement.
226 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Infringement deter-
mined by reference to patent, and not machine 312(3) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Evidence held to
manufactured by patentee.-Abbott Coin Coun- sustain master's findings apportioning profits
ter Co. v. Standard-Johnson Co., 418.
among owners of several patents.-Internation-

al Radio Telegraph Co. v. Atlantic Communi- | 1,097,544.
cation Co., 698.

318(3) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) "Profit" defined;
"payments."-International Radio Telegraph 1,137,413.
Co. v. Atlantic Communication Co., 698.

326 (2) (U.S.C.C.A.Conn.) Owner of other
interest in patent involved held not in con- 1,138,031.
tempt for violating injunction against notice
of infringement.-McCall Co. v. Bladworth,
365.

1,138,033.

327 (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Interlocutory decree
does not render questions of validity and in-
fringement res judicata, as affecting another
suit; "final decree."-American Foundry Equip-1,138,037.
ment Co. v. Wadsworth, 195.

XIII. DECISIONS ON THE VALIDITY, CON-
STRUCTION, AND INFRINGEMENT
OF PARTICULAR PATENTS.

328.

UNITED STATES.

ORIGINAL.

Garment hanger bag, claims 2 and
3, held valid, and not infringed (D.
C. N. Y.) 290 F. 529.
Metering panel board, claims 1, 6,
and 9, held invalid (C. C. A. N.
Y.) 290 F. 661.

Brick arch for locomotive boiler fur-
naces, held void (C. C. A. Ill.) 290
F. 647.

Brick for locomotive furnace arches,
claim 5, held void; other claims
held not infringed (C. C. A. Ill.)
290 F. 647.

Brick for locomotive boiler furnace
arches, held not infringed (C. C.
A. III.) 290 F. 647.

1,178,752. Refractory wall in locomotive boiler
furnace, held valid and infringed
(C. C. A. Ill.) 290 F. 647.

1,186,477. Process for hardening siccative coat-
ings, claims 2 and 4, held void (C.
C. A. N. Y.) 290 F. 625.
Stainless steel, held not anticipated,
valid, and infringed (C. C. A. N.
Y.) 290 F. 103.

411,454. Talking machine art, claim 1, held in- 1,197,256.
valid and void (D. C. Del.) 290 F.
565.

705,042. Fire escape, held not anticipated and 1,212,805.
valid, and claims 1 and 3 infringed;
claim 2, held not infringed (C. C. A.
Wis.) 290 F. 71.

904,494. Locomotive boiler furnace, held not in-
fringed (C. C. A. Ill.) 290 F. 647.
920,490. Panel board for electrical power dis-
tribution, claims 1, 5, 6, 9, and 10,
held invalid (C. C. A. N. Y.) 290 F.
661.

1,229,102.

1,255,819.
1,265,910.

934,157. Locomotive boiler furnace, held void
(C. C. A. Ill.) 290 F. 647.
934,723. Locomotive boiler furnace, held not
anticipated, valid and infringed (C.
C. A. Ill.) 290 F. 647.
946,442. Talking machine art, claim 19, held
void (D. C. Del.) 290 F. 565.

1,269,134.

1,286,115.

1,299,404.

949,442. Preparation for case-hardening steel,
held void (C. C. A. Ill.) 290 F. 169.
986,698. Railway tie plate, held not infringed 1,309,686.

(C. Č. A. Ill.) 290 F. 811.

990,375. Locomotive boiler, furnaces. held not

infringed (C. C. A. Ill.) 290 F. 647.

1,028,582. Device for administering anæsthet- 1,316,240.
ies, claims 1, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 14,
held not infringed (C. C. A. Ohio)
290 F. 665.

1,028,583. Device for administering anæsthet-
ics, claims 2, 8, and 9. held not in-

1,320,900.

fringed (C. C. A. Ohio) 290 F. 1,342,931.
665.

1,046,008. Brick for locomotive furnace arches,

held not infringed (C. C. A. Ill.) 1,419,583.
290 F. 647.

1,063,720. Crown cork assembling machine,
claim 1, held valid and not in-
fringed (D. C. N. Y.) 290 F. 223.
1,069,974. Locking brick for locomotive furnace
arches, claim 3, held void (C. C.
A. Ill.) 290 F. 647.

1,080,381. Coin-counting machine, claim 1, held
valid, but not infringed (D. C. N.
Y.) 290 F. 418.

1,090,776. Motometer, held valid and infringed
(D. C. N. J.) 290 F. 998.

Reinforced garment, claim 2, held in-
valid, and not infringed (C. C. A.
Ill.) 290 F. 812.

Talking doll, claims 1, 2, 3, and 4,
held not anticipated, valid and in-
fringed (D. C. N. Y.) 290 F. 537.
File, claims 3 and 4, held void (C. C.
A. N. J.) 290 F. 788.

Device for administering anesthet-
ics, claims 1 and 2, held invalid
(C. C. A. Ohio) 290 F. 665.
Oil and gas separator, held infringed
(C. C. A. Cal.) 290 F. 54.
Vacuum cleaner, claim 4, held void;
claims 1 to 3, held not infringed
(C. C. A. N. Y.) 290 F. 184.
Stainless steel, held valid and in-
fringed (C. C. A. N. Y.) 290 F.
103.

Device for administering anesthet-

ics, claims 6 and 7, held not in-
fringed (C. C. A. Ohio) 290 F.
665.
Lunch box, claim 1, held void; claim
2, held valid and infringed (D. C.
N. Y.) 290 F. 523.
Device for administering anæsthet-
ics, held not infringed (C. C. A.
Ohio) 290 F. 665.

Spacer brick for locomotive furnac-
es, held void (C. C. A. Ill.) 290
F. 647.

Feeding attachment for cork-assem-
bling machines, claim 1, held void;
claims 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, held valid.
but not infringed (D. C. N. Y.)
290 F. 223.

See Subrogation.

PAYMENT.

I. REQUISITES AND SUFFICIENCY.
12(5) (U.S.C.C.A.Md.) Policies covering
loss of American vessel in American waters

INDEX-DIGEST

Public Lands

For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER

held payable in dollars.-Marine Ins. Co. v.
McLanahan, 685.

II. APPLICATION.

PRESCRIPTION.

See Limitation of Actions.

PRINCIPAL AND AGENT.

36 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Application of payment
after suit brought does not bind court.-Bacon See Attorney and Client; Brokers.
v. Dollar S. S. Lines, 964.

43 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) On running account with-
out specific direction should be applied to first
items.-Bacon v. Dollar S. S. Lines, 964.

46(1) (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Where parts of in-
debtedness are differently secured, a payment
generally should be applied on part least se-
cured.-Bacon v. Dollar S. S. Lines, 964.

See Equity,

PLEADING.
152-330.

III. RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES AS TO
THIRD PERSONS.

(A) Powers of Agent.

not authorized to sell stock owned by estate.—
103(7) (U.S.C.C.A.Wis.) Third person held
Montague v. Storrow, 912.

106 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Charterers held
bound by action of agent at port of discharge
as to payment of dispatch money.-The Sif,
361.
Payment by agent binds principal.-Id.
estopped by laches to deny authority of agent.

For pleadings in particular actions or proceed-137(1) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Charterers
ings, see also the various specific topics.
For review of rulings relating to pleadings, see-The Sif, 361.
Appeal and Error.

I. FORM AND ALLEGATIONS IN GENERAL.

17 (D.C.) Facts should be pleaded posi-
tively and directly.-U. S. Shipping Board
Emergency Fleet Corporation v. Levensaler,
297.

(B) Undisclosed Agency.

held

closed principal cannot be joined in suit for
145(4) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Agent and undis-
breach of contract made by agent.-The Jung-
shoved, 733.

PRINCIPAL AND SURETY.
III. DISCHARGE OF SURETY.

VI. AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTAL
PLEADINGS AND REPLEADER.
250 (U.S.D.C.Mass.) Plaintiff held entitled
to amend declaration by claiming special dam-18 (U.S.C.C.A.Neb.) Father, signing son's
ages as against sureties on bond given to dis- note after consideration delivered, not liable.
charge attachment. White v. Nemours Trad-123(1) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Failure to give
-Nations v. Gregg, 157.
ing Corporation, 250.

POISONS.

2 (U.S.C.C.A.Neb.) Harrison Anti-Narcotic
Act constitutional.-Wick v. U. S., 191.

three days' notice as to vessel hire default held
not excused by doubt as to whether vessel was
off hire.-Suzuki v. National Surety Co., 942.

PROHIBITION.

9 (U.S.C.C.A.Cal.) Evidence held sufficient See Intoxicating Liquors.

to sustain conviction for unlawful dealing in

narcotics.-Leon v. U. S., 384.

9 (U.S.C.C.A.Ill.) Evidence held sufficient

PUBLIC LANDS.

to take to jury issue of proprietor's guilt of II. SURVEY AND DISPOSAL OF LANDs of
unlawfully selling morphine.-Montgomery v. U.
S., 961.

9 (U.S.C.C.A.Wash.) Evidence held to sus-
tain conviction for sale of narcotics.-Hirata v.
U. S., 197.

9 (U.S.C.C.A.W.Va.) Indictment held not
to state offense.-Pendleton v. U. S., 388.

POST OFFICE.

III. OFFENSES AGAINST POSTAL LAWS.

UNITED STATES.

(B) Entries, Sales, and Possessory Rights.
29 (D.C.) Lands acquired from Indian
tribe held public lands.-Morrison v. Fall, 306.

35(3) (U.S.C.C.A.Wash.) Residence on one
tract will not support homestead claim to dif-
ferent tract.-Great Northern Ry. Co. v. Mc-
Phee, 4.

(F) Swamp and Overflowed Lands.

35 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Essence of offense of60 (D.C.) Legality of patent of lands to
using mails to defraud is fraudulent nature of
state cannot be determined where state is not
scheme.-Brewer v. U. S., 807.
a party.-Morrison v. Fall, 306.

reviewed.-Great Northern Ry. Co. v. Mc-316(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Vt.) Rule as to speed Phee, 4. not inadmissible in evidence.-Boston & M. R. R. v. Daniel, 916.

Departmental decision as to ownership of improvements conclusive, unless unsupported 327 (1) (U.S.C.C.A.Mo.) Driving on track by evidence or result of error of law.-Id. without looking or listening negligence.-WaDecision of Land Department on claim of bash Ry. Co. v. Huelsmann, 165. plaintiff's predecessor to different land held not conclusive.-Id.

PUBLIC. SERVICE COMMISSIONS.

7 (U.S.D.C.Ala.) Authority to make contracts as to rates not to be implied.-Mobile Gas Co. v. Patterson, 476.

22 (U.S.D.C.La.) Orders not enjoined, unless conclusively shown to be violative of Constitution.-Bush v. Texas & P. Ry. Co., 1008. PUBLIC SERVICE CORPORATIONS. See Carriers; Railroads.

QUIETING TITLE.

327(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Vt.) Vermont rule as to traveler's duty to stop, look, and listen stated. -Boston & M. R. R. v. Daniel, 916.

328(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Mo.) Automobile truck Ry. Co. v. Huelsmann, 165. driver held negligent in not looking.-Wabash

330 (2) (U.S.C.C.A.Mo.) Neither open gates to look and listen.-Wabash Ry. Co. v. Huelsnor failure to give signals relieves from duty

mann, 165.

346(5) (U.S.C.C.A.Vt.) Burden of proving contributory negligence on defendant.-Boston & M. R. R. v. Daniel, 916.

350 (2) (U.S.C.C.A.Vt.) Evidence as to existence of public highway held insufficient for jury.-Boston & M. R. R. v. Daniel, 916.

(G) Injuries to Persons on or near Tracks. 361 (U.S.C.C.A.Minn.) Station grounds

I. RIGHT OF ACTION AND DEFENSES. 4 (U.S.D.C.Va.) Suit to remove cloud from title held not proper remedy.-Steinman Devel-held exempt from statutory requirement of opment Co. v. Ritter Lumber Co., 832.

RAILROADS.

I. CONTROL AND REGULATION IN
GENERAL.

52 [New, vol. 6A Key-No. Series]

(D.C.) Director General suable for injuries inflicted by his employee.-Seymoure v. Director General of Railroads, 291.

V. RIGHT OF WAY AND OTHER INTER-
ESTS IN LAND.

81 (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Contract between railroad company and pipe line company granting right of way for pipe line held not ultra vires. -Central R. Co. of New Jersey v. U. S. Pipe Line Co., 983.

VIII. INDEBTEDNESS, SECURITIES,
LIENS, AND MORTGAGES.

fencing. Sirovy v. Davis, 60.

Statutory requirement to fence tracks.-Id. Company held not liable for injury to boy in station yards.-Id.

400(4) (U.S.C.C.A.Minn.) Whether statute required fencing of grounds at station held for court. Sirovy v. Davis, 60.

(B) Grounds of Appointment of Receiver.

19 (U.S.C.C.A.Or.) Court held to have had jurisdiction to appoint receiver for irrigation system, necessary to preserve security of mortgage.-Hoover v. Mortgage Co. for America,

891.

II. APPOINTMENT, QUALIFICATION, AND

TENURE.

(B) Foreclosure of Liens and Mortgages. 194(3) (U.S.D.C.Mich.) Contract existing when mortgage was given passes under foreclosure sale as mortgaged property.-Detroit & 54 (U.S.C.C.A.Or.) Appointment for irriT. S. L. R. Co. v. Detroit, T. & I. R. Co., 549. gation system, to preserve security of mortContract held adopted by purchaser at fore-gage held jurisdictional and not subject to atclosure sale.-Id. tack by parties appearing in litigation with194(5) (U.S.D.C.Mich.) Purchaser at fore- out raising question of jurisdiction over them. closure sale held to have succeeded to contract-Hoover v. Mortgage Co. for America, 891. of mortgagor.-Detroit & T. S. L. R. Co. v. Detroit, T. & I. R. Co., 549.

X. OPERATION.

(F) Accidents at Crossings. 312(3) (U.S.C.C.A.Vt.) Equipment of engine with bell and whistle immaterial as to duty to sound warning.-Boston & M. R. R. v. Daniel, 916.

312(6) (U.S.C.C.A.Vt.) Statute requiring signals for "road" or "street" crossings held to refer only to highway.-Boston & M. R. R. v. Daniel, 916.

IV. MANAGEMENT AND_DISPOSITION OF

PROPERTY.

(A) Administration in General.

90 (U.S.D.C.Mich.) Receivers, who continue to give and accept performance of personal contracts, are bound thereby.-Detroit & T. S. L. R. Co. v. Detroit, T. & I. R. Co., 549.

Under order of appointment, acceptance of performance of contract by receivers held not affirmance.-Id.

Are without power to cancel a contract as between the parties.-Id.

INDEX-DIGEST

For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER

Performance of contract by receiver of party is performance by the party.-Id.

92 (U.S.C.C.A.Or.) Absence of irrigation district held not to affect agreement it should operate system without disturbing receivers' possession.-Hoover v. Mortgage Co. for America, 891.

Sales

(B) Separable Controversies. separable.-Allen v. Hauss, 253. 48 (U.S.D.C.Mich.) Controversy held not

RETROSPECTIVE LAWS.

See Constitutional Law, 194.

95 (U.S.D.C.Mich.) Are without power to cancel a contract as between the parties, but may by contract reserve right to reject.-De- See Taxation. troit &T. S. L. R. Co. v. Detroit, T. & I. R. Co., 549.

VII. ACCOUNTING AND COMPENSATION.

REVENUE.

REVIEW.

RISKS.

See Appeal and Error.

199 (U.S.C.C.A.Or.) Court has discretion See Master and Servant, 206–213. to fix compensation of receiver and make it a lien on the property.-Hoover v. Mortgage Co. for America, 891.

VIII. FOREIGN AND ANCILLARY RECEIV

ERSHIPS.

ROADS.

See Highways.

RULES OF COURT.

SALES.

209 (U.S.C.C.A.Mass.) Local creditors See Court Rules Cited. may enforce claims against local assets in hands of ancillary receivers.-Brooks v. Smith, 33. Rights of local creditors on transfer of assets from ancillary to primary jurisdiction stated. -Id.

RECEIVING STOLEN GOODS.

3 (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Knowledge of theft_essential element of offense.-Wolf v. U. S., 738.

7(4) (U.S.D.C.Fla.) Indictment for possession of interstate freight, knowing it to have been obtained by fraud, held to charge no federal offense.-U. S. v. Hopkins, 619.

I. REQUISITES AND VALIDITY OF
CONTRACT.

45 (U.S.D.C.N.C.) Seller
buyer had no intention of paying for goods.-
can rescind, if
City of Southport v. Williams, 488.

. II. CONSTRUCTION OF CONTRACT.

71 (3) (U.S.C.C.A.Pa.) Seller select cars where size of cars not specified, and entitled to instruction restricting recovery to average car7(5) (U.S.D.C.Fla.) Indictment charging load not erroneous.-American Lumber & Mfg. possession of interstate freight, known to have Co. v. Atlantic Mill & Lumber Co., 632. been stolen, held good, although description 71(4) (U.S.C.C.A.Mass.) Contract vague.-U. S. v. Hopkins, 619. as to quantity construed.-International Paper Co. v. Beacon Oil Co., 45.

RECORDS.

87 (3) (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Correspondence held See Appeal and Error, 705; Criminal Law, ted.-C. H. Pope & Co. v. Bibb Mfg. Co., 581. to show sale according to first sample submit1090-1128.

REFORMATION OF INSTRUMENTS.

1. RIGHT OF ACTION AND DEFENSES. 7 (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Equity will not aid enforcement of illegal contract.-Big Run Coal Co. v. Matthew Addy Co., 781.

III. MODIFICATION OR RESCISSION OF
CONTRACT.

(A) By Agreement of Parties,

89 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Letter as to sample after contract was closed held not to affect contract.-C. H. Pope & Co. v. Bibb Mfg. Co.,

581.

IV. PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT. (C) Delivery and Acceptance of Goods.

II. PROCEEDINGS AND RELIEF. 45(2) (U.S.C.C.A.Va.) Evidence of prior negotiations held not to authorize reformation of subcontract.-Stang & Mitchell v. U. S., 136.177 (U.S.C.C.A.Pa.) Embargo on shipments 45(15) (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Evidence held to show plaintiff intended violation of law by contract sought to be reformed.-Big Run Coal Co. v. Matthew Addy Co., 781.

REMOVAL OF CAUSES.

III. CITIZENSHIP OR ALIENAGE OF
PARTIES.

(A) Diverse Citizenship or Allenage in
General.

31 (U.S.C.C.A.Wis.) Joinder of corporation in suit to determine right to stock held not to prevent removal.-Harvey v. Harvey, 653.

to particular states not affecting contract containing no reference to such territory.-American Lumber & Mfg. Co. v. Atlantic Mill & Lumber Co., 632.

Embargo merely suspending transportation not authorizing purchaser to cancel contract. -Id. V. OPERATION AND EFFECT. (A) Transfer of Title as Between Parties. 199 (U.S.C.C.A.III.) Passing of title depends on intention.-Meyer v. W. R. Grace & Co., 785.

200 (3) (U.S.C.C.A.III.) Title to imported peanuts held to pass to buyer in Chicago when