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

Williamsport Wire Rope Company v. United States

• 1927 • 277 U.S. 551 • Taft Court
The Williamsport Wire Rope Company v. United States case in 1927 revolved around the issue of whether or not a patent for wire rope machinery was valid and enforceable. The Williamsport Wire Rope Company sued the U.S government, alleging that it had infringed on their patented technology by using similar machines to manufacture wire ropes at a navy yard. However, the Supreme Court ruled against them, stating that their patent was invalid due to lack of novelty as similar machines were already...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 Taft Court
Term: 1927
Docket: 337
277 U.S. 551
48 S. Ct. 587
72 L. Ed. 985
1928 U.S. LEXIS 697
Argued: Apr 24, 1928

Williamsport Wire Rope Company v. United States

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

The Williamsport Wire Rope Company v. United States case in 1927 revolved around the issue of whether or not a patent for wire rope machinery was valid and enforceable. The Williamsport Wire Rope Company sued the U.S government, alleging that it had infringed on their patented technology by using similar machines to manufacture wire ropes at a navy yard. However, the Supreme Court ruled against them, stating that their patent was invalid due to lack of novelty as similar machines were already in public use prior to their application date. Furthermore, even if the patent had been valid, its enforcement would have been limited because patents do not extend to products made by the U.S government for its own use under sovereign immunity.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Williamsport Wire Rope Company v. United States, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a tax on wire rope sales was incorrect. The dissenting justices believed that this tax constituted an unlawful direct tax, which is prohibited by the U.S Constitution unless apportioned among states based on population. They contended that since wire ropes are tangible personal property and not securities or commodities traded on exchanges, they should be exempt from such taxation under existing laws and precedents. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority’s interpretation of what constitutes income in relation to business transactions involving these goods; arguing instead for a narrower definition where only profits derived from their sale would qualify as taxable income rather than gross receipts as determined by the majority ruling.

Opinion written by Justice LDBrandeis
Decided: Jun 04, 1928
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