Legal Opinion

Remington Rand Corp. v. Amsterdam-Rotterdam Bank, N.V.

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided October 23, 1995No. 672, Docket 94-7519PublishedCited by 73 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LEVAL, Circuit Judge:

This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff Remington Rand Corporation (now The Kilbarr Corporation) (“Remington”) awarding damages exceeding $339 million against two Dutch banks (the “Banks”), Amsterdam-Rotterdam Bank, N.V. (“AMRO”) and Pierson, Heldring & Pierson, N.V. (“Pierson”). In prior litigation in the United States District Court for New Jersey, Remington obtained a judgment of $221,409,481 against Business Systems Inc., International N.V. (“BSI”), for misappropriation of trade secrets. See Remington Rand Corp. v. Business Sys., Inc., 830 F.2d 1260…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Allen v. McCurrySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  2. Parklane Hosiery Co. v. ShoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  3. Montana v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  4. Lightning Lube, Inc. v. Witco Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
  5. Burgos v. HopkinsCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by73 opinions

  1. United States v. Edmund M. AutuoriCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2000
  2. Securities Exchange Commission v. Monarch Funding Corporation, Leo M. Eisenberg, Steven R. Cloyes, and Richard M. Cannistraro, Richard O. BertoliCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1999
  3. Beaty v. McGrawCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1998
  4. Breeden v. Richmond Community CollegeDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1997
  5. Bear, Stearns & Co., Inc., Bear, Stearns Securities Corp., and Richard Harriton v. 1109580 Ontario, Inc., Docket No. 04-3632-CvCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2005

68 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API