Miller v. Hehlen

How courts have described this case

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

• holding a customer list was neither tangible property, nor “intangible property merged with a document in the same sense as a stock certificate or an insurance policy,” and therefore, the customer list did not constitute a chattel subject to conversion
• finding the defendant’s use of a customer list to solicit 26 customers of a former employer was not improper where the former employer gave her the 27 list after her employment ended
• customer list was not trade secret when employer gave it to former employee and did not condition its use
• “[W]e must interpret a contract in a way that gives meaning to all its material 8 terms and renders none superfluous.”
• “[A] competitor does not act improperly if his purpose at least in part is to advance his own economic interests.”
• \[C]ourts are not constrained by textual omissions to abandon common sense and experience or to ignore the surrounding circumstances of an agreement.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).