.10 , FEDERAL nnronrmn.
as his own. This usage was not shown to prevail generally, but appeared
from the evidence to be connned to a few states. It was not shown to exist
in the community where the complainant resided, nor was it shown that com-
plainant had any knowledge of such usage in the communities where the
. services were to be rendered. Held that, under this state of facts, the com-
plainant could not be held bound by any such usage.
4. SAME—ATTORNEY’S Rnnsorunnn Comrnusivrron.
T11irty—six dollars and sixty-four cents for each of 164 cases of like charac-
ter. held to be reasonable compensation for the service of a local solicitor.
In Equity.
Warren at Brandees, for plaintiff.
Wm. G. Russell, R. M. Morse, and A. D. Chandler, for defendant.
. Wann, J. The Goodyear Vulcanite Company was the proprietor
of a patent for the use of "vulcanite" in setting artificial teeth. The
Celluloid Manufacturing Company made and sold to dentists an ar-
ticle called "celluloid," extensively employed for the same purpose.
This use of celluloid was by the Goodyear Company claimed to be an
infringement of its patent. To protect its alleged rights, it com-
_ menced proceedings in equity against a large number of dentists in
Maine, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts, as well as in other states,
and threatened more. The Celluloid Company issued a circular to
dentists everywhere, saying:
" We do not undertake the defense of vulcanite; but if any dentist using
celluloid is sued, or if any motion is made to punish a dentist or hold him
liable in any way for using celluloid, or if any dentist is summoned before a
master for using it, let him notify us at once, sending us any papers served
on him, and not agree to admit any evidence in his case, or any record in any
other case, on any pretense whatever, nor take any steps in it whatever, un-
tilafter giving us such notice, and hearing from us or our counsel, * * *;
and if we can have control of the case from the outset, we will assume the
defense, confident of defeating," etc.
Thereupon the dentists intrusted the defense of the suits against
them to the Celluloid Company. The principal counsel relied on to
. conduct and control the defense being residents of states other than
those in which these suits were commenced, Mr. Chandler, the de-
fendant in this case, was retained as local counsel in lllassachusetts,
and directed to enter his appearance for the defendants in the suits
there. Mr. Chandler thereafter acted as local counsel in the Massa-
chusetts cases, attending to the various matters required of him,
keeping careful watch of the various steps taken by the complainants,
and constantly advising the leading and principal counsel of every
movement. The dentists, who were the defendants of record, were
frequently applying to him for information and direction, and he was
obliged to correspond extensively with them. The answers in the
several suite were prepared without Mr. Chand1er’s assistance, but he
kept watch that they should be seasonably nled, and was vigilant to
protect all parties against any advantage that might be taken of neg-
lect, delay, or omission in any respect. Only one of all these cases
was argued, resulting in a decree that the use of celluloid was not an