Simpson v. Davidson

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “an award of injunctive relief ordinarily will preclude a monetary award for a period in which the injunction is effective” (internal quotations omitted)
• finding that a forward-looking permanent injunction that “covered entirely separate periods of past and potential future use of misappropriated trade secret” did not amount to a double recovery
• affirming district court opinion that, inter alia, imposed permanent injunction related to entry of default judgment
• upholding a damages award “for the development costs [the defendant] avoided” along with a “forward- looking permanent injunction” prohibiting future use of the plaintiff’s trade secrets
• affirming the district court’s method of using plaintiff’s 7 research and development costs as indicative of the costs the defendant avoided by 8 misappropriating plaintiff’s trade secrets
• affirming permanent injunction on similar bases

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).