This case was a dispute between Consolidated Safety-Valve Company and Crosby Steam Gauge & Valve Company. Consolidated Safety-Valve Company had filed a patent infringement suit against Crosby Steam Gauge & Valve Company, claiming that Crosby had infringed upon Consolidated's patent for a safety valve. The district court found in favor of Consolidated, and Crosby appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court affirmed the district court's decision, finding that Crosby had indeed infringed upon Consolidated's patent. The Court held that Consolidated's patent was valid and that Crosby had copied the design of the safety valve without authorization. The Court also held that Consolidated was entitled to damages for the infringement. In conclusion, the Supreme Court found that Consolidated's patent was valid and that Crosby had infringed upon it. The Court affirmed the district court's decision and awarded Consolidated damages for the infringement.

In Consolidated Safety-Valve Company v. Crosby Steam Gauge & Valve Company, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a patent for an invention of a safety valve had been infringed upon by another company. The majority opinion held that the defendant had not infringed on the plaintiff's patent as it did not contain all of the elements described in their claim and thus could not be considered to have copied or stolen from them. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision, arguing that while certain features may have been missing from what was produced by the defendant, they still contained enough similarities to constitute infringement on behalf of the plaintiff's patent rights. He argued that if any part of an invention is taken without permission then it should be considered infringement regardless of how much or little has actually been taken and used without authorization.