Legal Opinion

Rohm and Haas Co. v. Lin

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 1, 2010PublishedCited by 65 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

SHOGAN, J.:

¶ 1 In these consolidated appeals, Dr. Manhua Lin (“Dr. Lin”) and EverNu Technology LLC (“EverNu”) appeal from the order entering a default judgment and a permanent injunction in favor of Dr. Lin’s former employer, Rohm and Haas Company (“Rohm and Haas”), as a discovery sanction against Dr. Lin. After careful review, we affirm in part, vacate in part and remand for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. We quash Ever-Nu’s appeal. 1

¶ 2 A previous panel of this Court set forth the factual and procedural history of this case as follows:

In the present case, the…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Buffalo Township v. JonesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  2. Strickland v. University of ScrantonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  3. Thunberg v. StrauseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  4. Berkeyheiser v. A-Plus Investigations, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  5. Croydon Plastics Co. v. Lower Bucks Cooling & HeatingSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1997

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

3Cited by65 opinions

  1. Bimbo Bakeries USA, Inc. v. BotticellaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2010
  2. In re Bridgeport Fire LitigationSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
  3. ANTHONY BIDDLE CONTRACTORS, INC. v. Preet Allied American Street, LPSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  4. Branham v. Rohm and Haas Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  5. Grimes v. Enterprise Leasing Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013

60 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