Legal Opinion

Steiny & Co. v. California Electric Supply Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 23, 2000No. B121149, B124698PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

NEAL, J.—

Summary

Where a plaintiff’s proper invocation of the trade secrets privilege prevents a defendant from examining the basis for the plaintiff’s damage claim, the trial court may properly bar the plaintiff’s damage evidence at trial. If a buyer and a seller exchange invoice and purchase order with conflicting warranty terms, but their conduct shows that a contract has been formed, California Uniform Commercial Code section 2207 applies to form a contract around the parts of the invoice and purchase order which agree, supplemented by the other applicable provisions of the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Soule v. General Motors Corp.California Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Peter Culley & Associates v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
  3. Martino v. DeneviCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
  4. North Oakland Medical Clinic v. RogersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  5. Ripley v. PappadopoulosCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Fox Searchlight Pictures, Inc. v. PaladinoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
  2. Viggiano v. Hansen Natural Corp.District Court, C.D. California · 2013
  3. Mardirossian & Associates, Inc. v. ErsoffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  4. Concepcion v. Amscan Holdings, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2014
  5. 2,022 Ranch L.L.C. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004

15 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