Skip to main content
· 3/13/2002

Berghausen v. Microsoft Corp.

Citations

  • 765 N.E.2d 592
  • 2002 Ind. App. LEXIS 393
  • 2002 WL 387244

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • stating that the plaintiff “does [not] offer argument explaining why Microsoft’s ‘implicit representations’ would fit within the [DCSA] definition of deceptive acts”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Mattingly May

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.