Macy's Inc. v. Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• “A court should ‘not write into a contract conditions the parties did not include by adding or excising terms under the guise of construction . . . .’”
• Defendant induced a competitor’s business partner to breach their exclusive contract and then misappropriated plaintiff’s “confidential competitive information obtained from [the business partner]” through that breach of contract
• “a court should ‘not write into a contract conditions the parties did not include by adding or excising terms under the guise of construction . . . .’”
• “[T]he rules of construction of contracts require the court to adopt an interpretation which gives meaning to every provision of a contract or, in the negative, no provision of a contract should be left without force and effect.” (further brackets and citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).