Marshall Hunn v. Dan Wilson Homes, Incorporated, e

How courts have described this case

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

• dismissing CFAA claim, reasoning that the defendant accessed the computer while still employed at the plaintiffs company
• quoting, in turn, Graham Mortg. Corp. v. Hall, 307 S.W.3d 472, 479 (Tex. App. – Dallas 2010, no pet.)
• “The Court makes these findings after carefully considering the parties’ arguments, attached documents and affidavits, and claims and defenses raised by each party.”
• “Although these factors are useful, we have ‘rejected the idea that district courts are bound to apply verbatim the [Fogerty] factors.’” (quoting Compaq Comput. Corp. v. Ergonome Inc., 387 F.3d 403, 412 (5th Cir. 2004))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).