Schroeder

Schroeder v. Wheeler

Good Law
126 Cal. App. 367·1932 Cal. App. LEXIS 450·14 P.2d 903
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 27, 1932Docket No. 7819.California3,593 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Landis, J.

The following are the facts as stated in appellant’s brief and appear to substantially cover the controlling facts, to wit:

It became necessary for defendant to file additional applications in the patent office to protect her interests adequately and to enable her to take legal proceedings if her rights should be invaded by infringers. She was not financially able to compensate Schroeder for his services as a patent attorney. A contract was therefore made in writing between plaintiff and defendant, by the terms of which plaintiff agreed to file and prosecute all patent and trademark applications for defendant and protect defendant against infringement and unfair competition “by employing counsel when necessary”. In consideration of these covenants the defendant agreed to compensate plaintiff in an amount equal to five per cent of the gross income from her “Lavalon” business. This contract was entered into on May 21, 1926, and was to continue in force for a period of ten years.

On August 5, 1927, the defendant ceased to make payments under the contract and on October 10, 1927, wrote a letter to plaintiff purporting to terminate and cancel the same. Thereupon plaintiff filed his…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.