We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo






  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 183

Third Circuit addresses standard for evaluating misappropriation of confidential information claims

  • Ogletree Deakins
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 2 2009

In this case, the defendant’s previous employer sued him, as well as his new employer, after learning that he had misappropriated product information which he then used to capture his former employer’s clients

NJ Supreme Court expands whistleblower law's coverage

  • Ogletree Deakins
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 27 2007

The New Jersey Supreme Court recently issued two opinions expanding the class of workers entitled to protection under the Conscientious Employee Protection Act ("CEPA"), N.J.S.A. 34:19-1 to -8, also known as New Jersey's "whistleblower" statute

SEC, district court approve company’s exclusion of shareholder policy proposal

  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 2 2008

On April 22, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas ruled that Apache Corporation could, pursuant to Rule 14a-8 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, reject the inclusion in its proxy statement of a shareholder proposal prohibiting the company from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity

Unwritten secrets are protectable under the Uniform Trade Secrets Act

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 27 2008

Addressing the issue of trade secret infringement, the Supreme Court of Ohio affirmed the appellate court’s decision holding that memorization and use of trade secret information belonging to a former employer constitutes trade secret infringement in accordance with the Uniform Trade Secrets Act

Former employer’s suggestion to customers to refrain from doing business with alleged misappropriator not actionable as defamation

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 13 2008

In almost every trade secretrestrictive covenant dispute, a company whose trade secret information has been stolen must confront the possibility that its customers will be dragged into the dispute

Ohio appellate court upholds entry of temporary injunction

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 9 2009

The Ohio 12th District Court of Appeals recently upheld a lower court's injunction against two former employees and their new employer in light of defendants' apparent breach of duty of loyalty, misappropriation of trade secrets, and tortious interference with business relations

Eleventh Circuit affirms sentence of Coca-Cola employee who stole trade secrets

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 4 2008

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the sentence of a former Coca-Cola Company employee and one of her co-conspirators for conspiracy to commit theft of trade secrets in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1832(a

Use of memorized trade secrets is a violation of Ohio Trade Secrets Act

  • Squire Sanders
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 15 2008

The Supreme Court of Ohio unanimously ruled last week that a former employee's use of memorized trade secret information violates Ohio's Trade Secrets Act

New Jersey whistleblower protection may be extended to independent contractors

  • Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 18 2007

The New Jersey Supreme Court recently issued decisions in D’Annunzio v. Prudential Ins. Co. and Stomel v. City of Camden, two highly anticipated rulings regarding who may sue under the Conscientious Employee Protection Act (“CEPA” or the “Act”), New Jersey’s whistleblower statute

Trade secrets can be all in your mind

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 29 2008

In Al Minor & Associates, Inc. v. Martin, 117 Ohio St.3d 58, 2008-Ohio-292, the Ohio Supreme Court recently held that memorizing information, including specifically client lists, constitutes trade secret misappropriation

Current Search

Suggested Facets

Author

Firm Name

Jurisdiction

Workarea

© Copyright 2006-2013 Globe Business Publishing Ltd | Cookies | Disclaimer | Privacy policy