Legal Opinion

George v. Schirra

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 18, 2002PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BENDER, J.:

¶ 1 This is an appeal from an order denying reconsideration of a discovery order regarding alleged trade secrets. Appellants allege four errors on the part of the trial court: the court improperly allowed the discovery of Home Lab Notes containing confidential trade secrets of Appellant; the Home Lab Notes are not relevant to the current litigation; the master’s finding that the Home Lab Notes “may relate in some way” to the matters of the current litigation is incorrect and an insufficient reason for ordering their disclosure and the order requiring the disclosure was premature.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Air Products & Chemicals, Inc. v. JohnsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  2. Hagy v. Premier Manufacturing Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
  3. Dibble v. Penn State Geisinger Clinic, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  4. Miller Oral Surgery, Inc. v. DinelloSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  5. Land v. State Farm Mutual InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Rohm and Haas Co. v. LinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
  2. Berg v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
  3. Crum v. Bridgestone/Firestone North American Tire, LLCSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  4. Cooper v. SchoffstallSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  5. PECO Energy Co. v. Insurance Co. of North AmericaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2004

19 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