Legal Opinion
Preston v. Marathon Oil Co.
Wyoming Supreme Court
Decided May 10, 2012No. S-11-0166PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KITE, Chief Justice.
[¶ 1] The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Cireuit certified a question to us regarding the validity of an assignment of intellectual property rights given by Yale Preston to Marathon Oil Company without any additional consideration other than continued at-will employment.
CERTIFIED QUESTION
[¶ 2] The certified question is:
Does continuing the employment of an existing at-will employee constitute adequate consideration to support an agreement containing an intellectual property-assignment provision?
Our answer to the question is "yes," continuation of at-will…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Harsco Corp. v. Lucjan ZlotnickiCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1986
- Wilder v. Cody Country Chamber of CommerceWyoming Supreme Court · 1994
- Hopper v. All Pet Animal Clinic, Inc.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1993
- Brodie v. General Chemical Corp.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1997
- McLean v. Hyland Enterprises, Inc.Wyoming Supreme Court · 2001
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- State v. MaresWyoming Supreme Court · 2014
- David A. Pope, CPA LLC and David A. Pope, Individually v. Mary C. RosenbergWyoming Supreme Court · 2015
- Sinclair Wyoming Refining Company v. Infrassure, LtdWyoming Supreme Court · 2021
- Michel Skaf, M.D. v. Wyoming Cardiopulmonary Services, P.C., a Wyoming corporationWyoming Supreme Court · 2021
- Preston v. Marathon Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2012
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.