Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Keystone Driller Co. v. General Excavator Co.

• 1933 • 290 U.S. 240 • Hughes Court
The Keystone Driller Co. v. General Excavator Co., 1933, was a U.S Supreme Court case that revolved around the issue of patent infringement and unclean hands doctrine in equity law. The Keystone Driller Company had purchased five patents related to earth excavating machines and sued the General Excavator Company for infringing upon these patents. However, it was revealed during the trial that one of those patents (the Hazelton patent) had been procured through fraudulent means by bribing a...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Hughes Court
Term: 1933
Docket: 34
290 U.S. 240
54 S. Ct. 146
78 L. Ed. 293
1933 U.S. LEXIS 460
Argued: Oct 09, 1933

Keystone Driller Co. v. General Excavator Co.

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

The Keystone Driller Co. v. General Excavator Co., 1933, was a U.S Supreme Court case that revolved around the issue of patent infringement and unclean hands doctrine in equity law. The Keystone Driller Company had purchased five patents related to earth excavating machines and sued the General Excavator Company for infringing upon these patents. However, it was revealed during the trial that one of those patents (the Hazelton patent) had been procured through fraudulent means by bribing a witness to withhold evidence about prior use of similar technology which would have invalidated this patent claim if disclosed earlier. This led to an application of "unclean hands" doctrine where courts refuse relief to those who acted unethically or in bad faith regarding their legal claims or defenses at hand irrespective of whether such misconduct is directly relevant to other claims involved in litigation or not. Consequently, due to its unethical conduct involving one out of five patents, Keystone's entire suit against General Excavator was dismissed.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Keystone Driller Co. v. General Excavator Co., Justice Cardozo argued that the majority's decision to dismiss a patent infringement lawsuit due to unclean hands was too harsh and not in line with precedent or principle. He pointed out that while it is true that fraud had been committed by suppressing evidence, this did not directly relate to the validity of the patents themselves, which were never obtained through fraudulent means. The suppression of evidence occurred during an earlier unrelated case and should have been dealt with separately rather than being used as grounds for dismissal in this case. In his view, dismissing a potentially valid claim because of misconduct in another matter goes beyond what is necessary or justified under the doctrine of unclean hands.

Opinion written by Justice PButler
Decided: Dec 04, 1933
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms