Legal Opinion

Superbrace, Inc. v. Tidwell

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 23, 2004No. G033363PublishedCited by 3 opinions

[CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION*]

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

O’LEARY, Acting P. J.

There is a debate among federal and state courts as to whether state or federal common law should be applied to cases involving the transfer of patent license rights. In the case before us, Kelly Tidwell and Fran Cyrus (collectively Tidwell unless otherwise indicated) challenge the trial court’s application of state law in holding Robert and Barbara Gebauer could transfer their exclusive license to manufacture, market, and sell Tidwell’s patented inventions. After considering our Supreme Court’s ruling in Farmland Irrigation Co. v. Dopplmaier (1957) 48 Cal.2d 208…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. American Well Works Company v. Layne and Bowler CompanySupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  3. Hapgood v. HewittSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  4. James G. Wilson v. George A. Sanford and Robert G. MusgroveSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
  5. Farmland Irrigation Co. v. DopplmaierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Lazar v. BishopCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2024
  2. Manela v. StoneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2021
  3. Venus Liquidation Inc.United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API