Russo v. Ballard Medical Products

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing the ability of the plaintiff ―to recover the full incremental value added by [the defendant‘s] misappropriated trade secret‖ under the UUTSA
• rejecting the defendant’s argument that the jury’s award “exceeded what the record evidence could support” when the jury awarded an amount lying “somewhere in between the extremes suggested by the evidence received at trial”
• rejecting the defendant’s argument that the jury’s award “exceeded what the record evidence could support” when the jury awarded an amount lying “somewhere in between the extremes suggested by the evidence received at trial”
• breach of contractual confidentiality did not raise a substantial question under patent law even though the plaintiff’s damages arose from the defendant’s use of the information to obtain a patent.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).