§Why CasetextPricing

Peterson vs. Coach, Inc.

Response

7 Cited authorities

  1. Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co.

    467 U.S. 986 (1984)   Cited 1,104 times   19 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a trade secret property right was protected under the Takings Clause

  2. Carpenter v. United States

    484 U.S. 19 (1987)   Cited 639 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "intangible nature" of certain property rights or interests "does not make it any less 'property' protected by the mail and wire fraud statutes"

  3. 580 Folsom Associates v. Prometheus Development Co.

    223 Cal.App.3d 1 (Cal. Ct. App. 1990)   Cited 91 times
    Rejecting argument that "the 'expenses' to be awarded as sanctions under section 128.5 cannot include other than costs including attorneys' fees"

  4. Calcor Space Facility, Inc. v. Superior Court

    53 Cal.App.4th 216 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 34 times
    Requesting party bears burden to determine "the manner in which [the responding party] maintains its records"

  5. Gt, Inc. v. Superior Court

    151 Cal.App.3d 748 (Cal. Ct. App. 1984)   Cited 13 times

    Docket No. AO24002. February 6, 1984. COUNSEL Ashley M. Winn for Petitioners. No appearance for Respondent. F. Bruce Dodge, Paul T. Friedman, Tracy L. Salisbury and Morrison Foerster for Real Parties in Interest. OPINION BARRY-DEAL, J. This petition challenges a protective order that prevents petitioners' attorney from showing discovered financial information to petitioners. We conclude that (1) where good cause is shown, a trial court may prevent a party from viewing financial information even where

  6. Nelson v. Superior Court

    184 Cal.App.3d 444 (Cal. Ct. App. 1986)   Cited 6 times

    Docket No. E002380. August 14, 1986. Page 445 COUNSEL Mack, Hazlewood, Franecke Tinney, Louis S. Franecke and Michael P. Terrizzi for Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. Robert F. Carlson, Gordon S. Baca, Joseph A. Montoya, Anthony J. Ruffolo and Donna Sue Levit Weissman for Real Party in Interest. OPINION KAUFMAN, J. Donald Eric Nelson, plaintiff in the underlying personal injury action, sought discovery of a number of California Highway Patrol (CHP) accident investigation reports. His several

  7. Westcott v. Gilman

    170 Cal. 562 (Cal. 1915)   Cited 33 times
    In Westcott v. Gilman, 170 Cal. 562, 568 [ 150 P. 777, 779, Ann.Cas. 1916E 437], it is said: "In truth the existence or nonexistence of a partnership in any case cannot be determined by... dissecting the whole relationship into broken parts and members, and studying each disjointed fragment as though it were the complete whole."