59 results for 'cat:"Contract" AND cat:"Injunction"'.
J. Ceresia finds that the lower court properly declined to permanently seal records related to a dispute between companies working to release lifesaving treatment for a rare childhood illness. The company seeking to manufacture the injectable drug contends trade secrets and other confidential information may be exposed prior to arbitration, while the developer of the drug pursued injunctive relief to continue the parties' master services agreement for production. However, the request to seal was overly broad and did not overcome the general presumption of open court access on a matter of public interest. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Ceresia, Filed On: January 11, 2024, Case #: CV-23-0428, Categories: Arbitration, contract, injunction
J. Gwin denies the roofing company's motion for a preliminary injunction against its former sales employee, ruling none of the more than 2,000 files taken by the employee before he left to join a competitor constitute trade secrets because no proprietary software was stolen and any previous bid information was rendered useless by shifting material costs.
Court: USDC Northern District of Ohio, Judge: Gwin, Filed On: January 8, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv1341, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Trade Secrets, contract, injunction
J. Windhorst finds that the trial court properly denied the former employer an injunction over an alleged breach of a non-competition agreement. The record shows that the employee denied electronically signing the non-competition agreement, and that the onboarding documents he signed in person did not contain a non-competition agreement. Further, the record does not contain an autogenerated email containing a link for the eight required onboarding documents to the employee's email. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Windhorst, Filed On: December 20, 2023, Case #: 23-CA-133, Categories: Employment, contract, injunction
J. Shah denies a maintenance product distributor’s motion for a preliminary injunction. The injunction would enforce a non-solicitation agreement against one of the distributor’s former employees, who after leaving the distributor to start a competitor, poached some of the distributor’s customers. The court finds that the distributor has not suffered harm necessitating an injunction, however, stating that the issue can be “adequately remedied through monetary damages.”
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Shah, Filed On: December 14, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv5314, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Employment, contract, injunction
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Frisch affirms the district court's denial of the purchaser's motion for a temporary injunction halting the cancellation of the sale of a mall. The district court was not obligated to presume the existence of irreparable harm should injunctive relief be denied, and the fact that the dispute concerns the purchase of real estate does not change that. It also did not abuse its discretion in concluding that the purchaser did not demonstrate irreparable harm as required. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Frisch, Filed On: December 11, 2023, Case #: A23-0598, Categories: Property, contract, injunction
J. Conley denies the hair care products company's motion to amend an injunction allowing the salon to be the exclusive distributor of its products in Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa and North Dakota. The motion, which would permit the company to sell its products on Amazon in the salon's territory, must be denied in part because the company has not met statutory notice requirements or shown good cause under Wisconsin's Fair Dealership Law. The salon's motion to amend its complaint to add the company's Swedish parent company as a defendant is granted, and the parties' joint motion to strike the case's schedule is denied.
Court: USDC Western District of Wisconsin, Judge: Conley, Filed On: November 15, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv695, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Commerce, contract, injunction
J. Bashant grants counter-claimant Viking Air's motion for a preliminary injunction enjoining Ikhana Group and Aevex Aerospace from marketing or selling any modification that increases the maximum take-off weight of Viking's 400 Series Twin Otter Aircraft in commuter operations. Viking has met its burden of demonstrating a likelihood of irreparable harm by alleging that Ikhana is using its trade secrets for commercial advantage and intends to continue using them. Meanwhile, the narrow injunction "will not pulverize Ikhana's existing business."
Court: USDC Southern District of California, Judge: Bashant, Filed On: November 7, 2023, Case #: 3:23cv1306, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Trade Secrets, contract, injunction
J. Pickering finds the district court improperly denied the artificial turf company’s request for a preliminary injunction to enforce a noncompete covenant against its former employees. The court denied the request, saying that the covenant was unenforceable due to procedural unconscionability, which consisted in the merger of the covenant into the preceding paragraph of the employment agreement. This is not enough to invalidate it without additional substantive unconscionability shown. The court was obligated to determine whether the covenant’s remaining flaws could be cured by revision under the statute governing noncompete agreements. Reversed and remanded.
Court: Nevada Supreme Court, Judge: Pickering, Filed On: November 2, 2023, Case #: 85249, Categories: Due Process, contract, injunction
J. Crouse finds the trial court properly determined an urban delivery company assented to a gig networking platform’s terms and conditions by creating its account, so the platform was therefore reasonable to enforce the forum-selection clause. The preliminary and antisuit injunctions were not in error and is overruled. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Crouse, Filed On: October 20, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-3807, Categories: contract, injunction
[Consolidated.] J. McFadden finds that the trial court improperly granted interlocutory injunctions in favor of the employer in a breach of contract action against the former employees alleging that they violated non-compete and other restrictive agreements. The Fulton County trial court was not the correct venue for issuing injunctive relief. Neither employee lives in Fulton County and the forum selection clause on which the employer relied is unenforceable. Reversed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: McFadden, Filed On: October 19, 2023, Case #: A23A0674, Categories: Employment, contract, injunction
J. Black denies a fitness gym’s motion for order of possession in this dispute over an asset purchase agreement for the sale of gym equipment to another gym. The suing firm has failed to show their entitlement for possession. A preliminary injunction is granted in favor of the suing gym to be issued in lieu of any relief under the replevin law. The purported buyer has a history of fraudulent conduct and has failed to pay the purchase price of $60,000. The equipment shall not be moved, disposed of in any way or concealed from the premises.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Black, Filed On: October 19, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv415, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: contract, injunction
J. Nugee finds a lower court improperly dismissed a bank's motion for a anti-suit injunction against a natural gas processor. The natural gas processor argued that the bank was entitled to arbitrate contract claims in Paris. However, the bank presented sufficient evidence in court that England is the proper venue for a request for injunction. Reversed.
Court: Her Majesty's Court of Appeal, Judge: Nugee, Filed On: October 12, 2023, Case #: CA-2023-1697, Categories: Jurisdiction, contract, injunction
J. Walker denies the company that franchises tax return preparation businesses' motion for an injunction prohibiting a former franchisee from operating a tax business within 25 miles of the company's franchises. The company alleges that since the former franchisee terminated the franchise agreement the former franchisee has yet to return the list of clients and other valuable information to the company. The company failed to show that it would suffer irreparable harm absent the injunction.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Virginia, Judge: Walker, Filed On: September 27, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv383, NOS: Franchise - Contract, Categories: Tax, contract, injunction
J. Marbley denies, in part, the community college's motion to dismiss, ruling while this court's previous injunction required it to make payments to the educational course developer for administrative costs and profit-sharing, it did not moot the contract claim in its entirety because the developer also seeks declaratory relief.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Marbley, Filed On: September 25, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv2653, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Education, contract, injunction
J. Magnuson grants the vehicle rental company a temporary restraining order enjoining the motorcycle rental agency from auctioning, using, operating or renting any of the former's vehicles, as the vehicle rental company's complaint alleges that the motorcycle rental agency did not pay all sums owed when renting the vehicles. The vehicle rental company demonstrates that the motorcycle rental agency likely breached the contract by continuing to use the vehicle rental company's mark on its websites despite the agreements' termination.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Magnuson, Filed On: September 22, 2023, Case #: 0:23cv2843, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: Trademark, contract, injunction
J. Brown finds that the trial court improperly ruled in favor of the city in a breach of contract, inverse condemnation and injunctive relief action brought by the companies arising from the city's alleged refusal to issue right-of-way permits to the companies for access to fiber optic lines installed as part of a 25-mile fiber optic wide area network in the city of Warner Robins. The companies voluntarily dismissed their initial federal court action. The companies' mandamus claim is not barred by res judicata. The claims relating to the wrongful termination of a lease agreement as it pertains to 12 fiber lines did not arise until after the dismissal. However, the companies' claims related to 48 other fiber lines arise out of the same facts as those asserted in the federal action and are therefore barred. Reversed in part.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Brown, Filed On: September 12, 2023, Case #: A23A0779, Categories: contract, injunction
J. Bredar denies a health care management minority business enterprise its motions for an emergency restraining order and preliminary injunction against a care coordination provider. The provider contracted with the enterprise as part of a larger project with the state department of children’s health services. The provider refused to renew the subcontract with the enterprise due to alleged poor performance. The enterprise claims the provider is discriminating against it as a Black business. However, this motion is unlikely to succeed because the enterprise shows no actionable evidence of discrimination.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Bredar, Filed On: August 10, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv1937, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment Discrimination, contract, injunction
J. Cooper denies, in part, a real estate investment firm's motion to dismiss a real estate database operator's claims related to the parties' licensing agreement. The operator has sufficiently alleged the firm is a competitor to support its breach claim, and it has shown possible irreparable harm from the firm's continued use of the database to support its claim for injunctive relief.
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: Cooper, Filed On: August 10, 2023, Case #: 1:21cv2227, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Licensing, contract, injunction
J. Blackwell denies the cookie dough franchisor's motion for a preliminary injunction preventing its former franchisee from operating a competing cookie dough business. The franchisor has not established harm from consumer confusion, and its current inability to sell franchises in Minnesota means that any frustration of that ability caused by competition is speculative. A claim that irreparable harm will result from other franchisees taking the franchisee's lead in disregarding the terms of their agreements is similarly speculative. The franchisor's likelihood of success on the merits of its claims is also diminished by a lack of clarity as to whether the noncompete provision serves a legitimate purpose when the franchisor cannot compete in Minnesota.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Blackwell, Filed On: August 1, 2023, Case #: 0:23cv1552, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: contract, injunction
J. Sammartino denies a company's motion for a temporary restraining order against a shareholder who allegedly threatened to dump his shares in the company in order bring about financial devastation. The company claims it would be financially hurt if the shareholder were to follow through on his threats, but these allegations fail to demonstrate irreparable harm, as this injury could be remedies by a damages award.
Court: USDC Southern District of California, Judge: Sammartino, Filed On: June 29, 2023, Case #: 3:23cv1064, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: contract, injunction
J. Lipman grants the motion to dissolve a temporary restraining order in this lawsuit involving certain noncompete agreements. The plaintiff medical equipment company, which brought the suit against two former employees and their new employer, fails to show "the need for continued injunctive relief on a temporary basis." The evidence does not show that the term "customer," as used within the agreements, was meant to include hospitals or medical facilities.
Court: USDC Western District of Tennessee , Judge: Lipman, Filed On: June 13, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv2344, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Employment, contract, injunction