20 Cited authorities

Fowler v. UPMC Shadyside
578 F.3d 203 (3d Cir. 2009) Cited 14,072 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion "in denying a motion for a class action determination which was untimely under the local rule"
Sovereign Bank v. Bj's Wholesale Club, Inc.
533 F.3d 162 (3d Cir. 2008) Cited 300 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that a claim was foreclosed based on an admission in the plaintiff's complaint
McDermott v. Clondalkin Grp., Inc.
649 F. App'x 263 (3d Cir. 2016) Cited 118 times
Rejecting "insinuate[ion] that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not permit facts pleaded upon information and belief to serve as the sole basis for relief" as "plainly incorrect"; cf.Essex Ins. Co. v. Miles , No. 10-3598, 2010 WL 5069871, at *3 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 3, 2010) (finding alter ego allegations insufficient where the sole fact not pled on information and belief was that the individual defendants were the owners of the corporation)
Bouton v. BMW of North America, Inc.
29 F.3d 103 (3d Cir. 1994) Cited 155 times
Holding that effective grievance procedures insulate the employer
Speakers of Sport, Inc. v. Proserv, Inc.
178 F.3d 862 (7th Cir. 1999) Cited 127 times
Holding that competition "provides a defense (the 'competitor's privilege') to the tort of improper interference"
Bro-Tech Corporation v. Thermax, Inc.
651 F. Supp. 2d 378 (E.D. Pa. 2009) Cited 93 times
Holding that malice "is negated by a showing that the acts alleged were done for professional or business benefit"
Torchia on Behalf of Torchia v. Torchia
346 Pa. Super. 229 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1985) Cited 144 times
Holding a party "must demonstrate that appellee has in fact been benefitted"
Sheet Metal Wkrs., L. 19 v. 2300 Group, Inc.
949 F.2d 1274 (3d Cir. 1991) Cited 83 times
Holding that court must make the initial determination whether the terms of a contract are susceptible to different meanings
Depuy Synthes Sales, Inc. v. Globus Med., Inc.
259 F. Supp. 3d 225 (E.D. Pa. 2017) Cited 34 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that where breach of fiduciary duty claim is dismissed pursuant to the gist-of-the-action doctrine, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty claim must be dismissed as well
In re G-I Holdings, Inc.
755 F.3d 195 (3d Cir. 2014) Cited 31 times
Refusing to read mandatory or exclusive requirements into a permissive contractual provision
Section 1839 - Definitions
18 U.S.C. § 1839 Cited 1,185 times 101 Legal Analyses
Recognizing that misappropriation is present where the acquiring entity “knows or has reason to know that the trade secret was acquired by improper means”

Acosta, Inc. v. Navitsky et al

20 Cited authorities

Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion "in denying a motion for a class action determination which was untimely under the local rule"

Holding that a claim was foreclosed based on an admission in the plaintiff's complaint

Holding that effective grievance procedures insulate the employer

Holding that competition "provides a defense (the 'competitor's privilege') to the tort of improper interference"

Holding that malice "is negated by a showing that the acts alleged were done for professional or business benefit"

Holding a party "must demonstrate that appellee has in fact been benefitted"

Holding that court must make the initial determination whether the terms of a contract are susceptible to different meanings

Holding that where breach of fiduciary duty claim is dismissed pursuant to the gist-of-the-action doctrine, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty claim must be dismissed as well

Refusing to read mandatory or exclusive requirements into a permissive contractual provision

Recognizing that misappropriation is present where the acquiring entity “knows or has reason to know that the trade secret was acquired by improper means”