Inserra v. Inserra

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a business’s social media accounts constituted collateral under a security agreement subject to a conversion claim when the defendants continued to use the social media accounts for their own business
• upholding trial court’s refusal to award disgorgement for breach of non-compete agreement because “Plaintiffs had not asserted a breach of fiduciary duty claim”
• upholding trial court’s refusal to award disgorgement for breach of non-compete agreement because “Plaintiffs had not asserted a breach of fiduciary duty claim”
• considering the nature of the defendant’s conduct with regard to the claims brought against the defendant and upholding the trial court’s award of $50,000 in punitive damages after a bench trial
• “[T]he Supreme Court of Georgia has rejected—at least implicitly—the idea that equity permits a court to extend the period of a non- compete agreement.”
• “[I]t is the function of the court to construe the contract as written and not to make a new contract for the parties.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).