Dresser-Rand Co. v. Virtual Automation Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that investment costs could be recovered as out-of-pocket expenses due to a defendant's fraud
• holding that it was reasonable for jury to find that use element was satisfied where defendant planned to create competitor product and differences between competitor product and plaintiffs product were only superficial
• “[A] plaintiff can prove there is no adequate remedy at law where damages cannot be calculated.”
• “[A] plaintiff can prove there is no adequate remedy at law where damages cannot be calculated.”
• “The Court finds that his past injuries and loss, if proven, are capable of being remedied by damages.”
• motions for new trial based on argument that verdict was against great weight of the evidence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).