The Joliet Mfg. Co. v. Dice
| Citation | 105 Ill. 649,1883 WL 10173 |
| Parties | THE JOLIET MANUFACTURING COMPANYv.ANDREW F. DICE. |
| Decision Date | 28 March 1883 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Illinois |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
APPEAL from the Appellate Court for the Second District;--heard in that court on appeal from the Circuit Court of Will county; the Hon. JOSIAH MCROBERTS, Judge, presiding.
Messrs. GARNSEY & KNOX, for the appellee.
This is a suit in chancery, brought by the appellant, seeking to compel Dice to assign to it a certain invention for a device in the construction of what are called “check rowers,” of which the bill charges that Dice is the original inventor, and also seeking to enjoin Dice from selling or assigning the same to any other person or persons. On hearing, the circuit court granted the relief sought. The complainant appealed to the Appellate Court, where the decree was reversed and the cause remanded, with directions to dismiss the bill. Complainant appeals to this court.
The bill charges that on October 18, 1881, the parties made a written contract, as follows:
“Articles of agreement entered into between the Joliet Manufacturing Company, of Joliet, Illinois, and Andrew F. Dice, now residing at Aurelia, Iowa: The said Andrew F. Dice agrees to work for the company named for the term of five years, from the 1st to the 15th of November next, in such capacity pertaining to the manufacturing of shellers and powers, and disposing of the same, as the company may consider for their best interest, as may be assigned by the president of the company; that he will work for the best interest of the company in every way that he can, and in whatever way such aid can be given shall belong to the company,--that is, improvements (previous to this date not included) that he may make or cause to be made. For which services the Joliet Manufacturing Company agree to pay the said Andrew F. Dice twenty-seven and one-half cents per hour, and agree to give him the privilege to make his time full,--that is, that time can be averaged so as to make ten hours per day the year round,--for all such labor performed, computing that time every month, and pay the same the 10th of the following month.
October 18, 1881.
THE JOLIET MANUFACTURING CO.,
By A. H. Shreffler, Prest.
A. F. DICE.”
The bill further charges that Dice entered the employment of the company in pursuance of this agreement, and a few months after this, and while Dice was so employed under this agreement, complainant (appellant) added to its business the manufacture of “check rowers,” (an attachment to a machine for planting corn,) and that Dice was assigned to the superintendence of said manufacture of “check rowers,” and entered upon this employment “as part of and in performance of” the above agreement, and so continued for some months; that during this service Dice made known to complainant that he had conceived an improvement in “check rowers,” and upon the suggestion of Dice the complainant directed him to employ his time, in the interests of the company, in perfecting the invention for its...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
American Circular Loom Co. v. Wilson
...Co. v. Eustis, 51 N. J. Eq. 565, 27 A. 439; Fuller & Johnson Mfg. Co. v. Bartlett, 68 Wis. 73, 31 N.W. 747, 60 Am. Rep. 838; Joliet Mfg. Co. v. Dice, 105 Ill. 649. It has enforced between partners. Belcher v. Whittemore, 134 Mass. 330; Burr v. De la Vergne, 102 N.Y. 415, 7 N.E. 366; Slemmer......
-
Velsicol Corp. v. Hyman
...which the rule in specific performance requires. Lindberg Machine Works v. Lindberg, 305 Ill.App. 543, 551, 27 N.E.2d 565;Joliet Mfg. Co. v. Dice, 105 Ill. 649. In support of its position as to an implied contract, plaintiff earnestly argues that it was organized to do special research work......
-
Pressed Steel Car Co. v. Hansen
... ... McClurg v ... Kingsland, 1 How. 202, 11 L.Ed. 102; Dalzell v ... Dueber Watch Case Mfg. Co., 149 U.S. 315, 13 Sup.Ct ... 886, 37 L.Ed. 749; Lane & Bodley Co. v. Locke, 150 ... U.S ... 92; Boston v. Allen, 91 F. 248, 33 ... C.C.A. 485; ... [137 F. 411] ... Joliet Mfg. Co. v. Dice, 105 Ill. 649; Fuller & ... Johnson Mfg. Co. v. Bartlett, 68 Wis. 73, 31 N.W ... ...
-
Monsanto Chemical Works v. Jaeger
...by the invention or patent is within the intention of the parties. Allison Bros. Co. v. Allison, 144 N. Y. 21 38 N. E. 956; Joliet Mfg. Co. v. Dice, 105 Ill. 649." After the date of the contract, June 26, 1925, during the running of the option, certain patent applications were filed by the ......