Legal Opinion

Henderson v. Rep Tech, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided June 22, 1990PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Upon our review of the record, we find that the evidence adduced at trial was sufficient to establish that plaintiff was a disloyal employee (see, Feiger v Iral Jewelry, 41 NY2d 928) and that he had exploited trade secrets. Consequently, the remedies of forfeiture, a permanent injunction, and the dismissal of plaintiff’s claims were proper. We reject plaintiff’s argument that the Referee exceeded the scope of the order of reference when he determined that plaintiff must reimburse defendant employer for all salary, commissions, and…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Harry R. Defler Corp. v. KleemanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1963
  2. Harry R. Defler Corp. v. KleemanNew York Court of Appeals · 1967

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Cameco, Inc. v. GedickeSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1999
  2. Aramony v. United Way of AmericaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1998
  3. Luskin v. SeoaneAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
  4. Ulico Casualty Co. v. Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & DickerNew York Supreme Court · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API