ALLEN V. THE MAYOE, ETC., OF NEW TOBK. 483 �the general treasury of the city, and the city itself must be liable to account for them. �H IB further afgued, that the case does not show any infringement by the fire department, even by using the pat- ented invention. The answer does not really deny, but rather admits, what would amount to an infringement. If that were not so the proofs fairly show infringement to some estent ; to what extent, if to any, before the bringing of the bill, is not now material. The extent ia a naatter to be set- tled in the aocounting. �Let there be the usual decree for au injanction and an account, with costs. ���Allen v. The Mayoe, Etc., op New York. (Gircull Gowt, 8. D. New York. June 15, 1880.) �1. Equiott — Pbactice— A-PPiiiCATioN OF Equity Bulbs. �Rules of equity are framed to bring a cause to hearing, and do not apply after a hearing, unless the necessary steps are taken to bring it •within their operation, and start the cause ane\t towards a hearing. �2. Samb— Same — Technical Defeots— Waiver. �After a hearing and decree a cause will not be opened for mere technical and unimportant defeots in the steps preliminary thereto, where no injustice bas resulted to the parties. Such defects, if not objected to at the time, must be considered as waived. �3. Patent — Decbbb Peo Confesso. �In a suit upon a patent for school furniture against a city, its board of education, and its several successors, where the board last organized failed to answer, and no decree pro eonfeeso was t^ken against it, and the cause proceeded without objection to a flnal hear- ing and decree upon the pleadings, Jield, that such board could not take advantage of the omission to enter the decree pro confessa and file its answer. �In Equity. �Wheblee, D. J. This suit was brought against the city and the then board of education, a corporation within that of the city, and an instrumentality of the city having charge of its educational interests and institutions, for infringement of ��� �
