Legal Opinion

Thermorama, Inc. v. Shiller

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided April 23, 1965No. 39656PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Knutson, Chief Justice.

A writ of prohibition has been issued upon the application of two defendants.

Plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for an alleged conspiracy by defendants to rain plaintiff’s business. It is plaintiff’s claim that defendants were bound by an oral contract to restrict themselves to the manufacture of various garments exclusively for plaintiff; that they were given secret information under a fiduciary relationship with plaintiff; and that unbeknown to plaintiff they had conspired together to destroy plaintiff’s business by setting up a rival business of their…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Ex Parte FaheySupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. Brown v. St. Paul City Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
  3. Jeppesen v. SwansonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
  4. Baskerville v. BaskervilleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1956
  5. Thermorama, Inc. v. BuckwoldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1964

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Underdahl v. Commissioner of Public SafetySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
  2. Shetka v. Kueppers, Kueppers, Von Feldt & SalmenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
  3. In Re Charges of Unprofessional Conduct Against N.P.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
  4. Carlisle Ex Rel. Scott v. City of MinneapolisCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1989
  5. Petition of GiblinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975

17 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