Waite v. United States
Cases that cite this one
53 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- ITT Corp. v. United States (Court of Claims 1989)
- Orr v. Sonnenburg (Ind. Ct. App. 1989)
- General Motors Corp. v. Devex Corp. (Supreme Court of the United States 1983)
- Marvin L. Fishman and Illinois Basketball, Inc. v. Estate of Arthur M. Wirtz, and Illinois Basketball, Inc. v. Estate of Arthur M. Wirtz (7th Cir. 1987)
- The Gyromat Corporation, Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Champion Spark Plug Company, Appellee/cross-Appellant (Fed. Cir. 1984)
- Leesona Corp. v. United States (Court of Claims 1979)
- Farrand Optical Co., Inc. v. The United States of America (2d Cir. 1963)
- Honeywell International Inc. v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 2012)
- Brunswick Corp. v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 1996)
- Ford Motor Co. v. Transport Indemnity Co. (In re Automobile Transport, Inc.) (District Court, E.D. Michigan 1984)
- Dynamics Corp. of America v. United States (Court of Claims 1984)
- Liberty Ammunition, Inc. v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 2014)
- Lighting Ballast Control, LLC v. Philips Electronics North America Corp. (District Court, N.D. Texas 2011)
- Wickham Contracting Co., Inc., Ralph Perone v. Local Union No. 3, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Afl-Cio (2d Cir. 1992)
- Monessen Southwestern Railway Co. v. Morgan (Supreme Court of the United States 1988)
- N. Idaho Bldg. Contractors Ass'n v. City of Hayden (Idaho 2018)
- Frank Gaylord v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 2013)
- National Food & Beverage Co. v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 2012)
- Boeing Co. v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 2009)
- Arkansas Game & Fish Commission v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 2009)
- CCA Associates v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 2007)
- Cienega Gardens v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 2005)
- Paymaster Technologies, Inc. v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 2004)
- Federal Marketing Co. v. Virginia Impression Products Co. (D.C. 2003)
- Standard Manufacturing Co. v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 1999)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the Court.
This is a suit under the Act of July 1, 1918, c. 114, 40 Stat.. 704, 705; U. S. Code, Title 35, § 68, to recover for the unlicensed use of a patented invention. The liability of the United States is established by the findings of the. Court of Claims and is not disputed. Neither is there any dispute that the profits that the plaintiff would have made are a proper measure of the damages suffered.' The Court of Claims, however, ruled that interest should not be allowed upon the amount so fixed, and a writ of cer-tiorari was granted by this Court upon that question.
The Government, without formally confessing error, states its. belief that interest should have been allowed. *509 The statute grants ‘ recovery of his reasonable and entire compensation for such use.’ We are of opinion that interest should be allowed in order to make the compensation ‘ entire.’ In addition to the purpose of the word, adverted to in Richmond Screw Anchor Co. v. United States, 275 U. S. 331, 343, we cannot doubt that it was intended to accomplish complete justice as between the plaintiff and the United States. See Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co. v. United States, 261 U. S. 299. Brooks-Scanlon Corp. v. United States, 265 U. S. 106. Liggett & Myers Tobacco Co. v. United States, 274 U. S. 215. Phelps v. United States, 274 U. S. 341.
Judgment reversed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.