E.D. Pennsylvania· 9/3/2009

Bro-Tech Corp. v. Thermax, Inc.

Citations

651 F. Supp. 2d 378
2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80636
2009 WL 2854891

How courts have described this case

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

holding that malice “is negated by a showing that the acts alleged were done for professional or business benefit”
holding that plaintiffs theory that defendants acted for their business advantage and benefit belies the notice that defendants acted purely out of malice and without a business motive, thereby precluding a civil conspiracy claim
holding that plaintiff's theory that defendants acted for their business advantage and benefit belies the notice that defendants acted purely out of malice and without a business motive, thereby precluding a civil conspiracy claim
holding that plaintiffs theory that defendants acted for their business advantage and benefit belies the notice that defendants acted purely out of malice and without a business motive, thereby precluding a civil conspiracy claim
holding that plaintiff's theory that defendants acted for their business advantage and benefit belies the notice that defendants acted purely out of malice and without a business motive, thereby precluding a civil conspiracy claim
finding that “the quality or extent of a particular individual’s authorization to access a computer is informed by the facts of the case.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Rufe

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

20 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

47 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.