O. & W. Thum Co. v. Tloczynski
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal from Kent; Adsit, J. Bill by the O. & W. Thum Company against Appollonious A. Tloczynski to enjoin the communication of trade secrets. From a decree for complainant, defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtMoore, J.
The complainant is the successor of the firm of O. & W. Thum, who were manufacturers of sticky fly paper. It filed a bill of complaint to restrain defendant from communicating to others the secret processes and methods, and the knowledge of secret machinery, which were learned by him while in the employ of O. & W.' Thum. The court below granted an injunction, as prayed in the bill of complaint. Defendant appeals.
The testimony is voluminous, and very conflicting. We are satisfied, however, that it establishes, by a very clear preponderance, the following facts: The defendant entered the employ…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Peabody v. NorfolkMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Tabor v. . HoffmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Bristol v. Equitable Life Assurance SocietyNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Blanchard v. Detroit, Lansing & Lake Michigan RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
- Richardson v. BuhlMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by44 opinions
- AO Smith Corporation v. Petroleum Iron Works Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1934
- Sherman v. PfefferkornMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922
- Hayes-Albion Corp. v. KuberskiMichigan Supreme Court · 1985
- Sarkes Tarzian, Inc. v. Audio Devices, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 1958
- Harrison v. Glucose Sugar Refining Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1902
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.