Skip to main content

E.J. Brooks Co. v. Cambridge Sec. Seals

Citations

  • 31 N.Y.3d 441
  • 2018 NY Slip Op 03171

How courts have described this case

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

  • “[R]ecovery of the benefit obtained by the defendant is the definition of an action for unjust enrichment.”
  • compensatory damages “cannot be remote, contingent or speculative,” but the standard “is not one of ‘mathematical certainty’ but only ‘reasonable certainty’” (quoting Steitz v. Gifford, 280 N.Y. 15, 20 (1939))
  • “[T]he amount of damages recoverable in an action for misappropriation of trade secrets may be measured either by the plaintiff's losses . . . or by the profits unjustly received by the defendant”
  • “A plaintiff claiming misappropriation of a trade secret must prove: (1

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

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

Other cases named E.J. Brooks Co. v. Cambridge Sec. Seals

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

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.