Legal Opinion

Salomon v. Hertz

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided October 15, 1885PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Bill for injunction. On motion to dissolve on bill and answers.

1Opinion of the Court

The Chancellor.

The complainant seeks by this suit to prevent Hertz and Adolphi, who were his trusted and confidential employees, from divulging to any one, and especially to Shattuck and Binger, any of the secrets of his business (that of a tanner and manufacturer of leather), and to prevent. Shattuck and Binger from accepting or using the information if communicated. He claims to be the discoverer of valuable secret and peculiar methods and processes for making Cordovan leather, and for tanning and manufacturing into leather of various desirable shades and colors, goat, kangaroo, alligator…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Peabody v. NorfolkMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Larx Co. Inc. v. NicolSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1946
  2. Haut v. RossbachNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1940
  3. Bond Electric Corp. v. KellerNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1933
  4. E. L. Bruce Co. v. Bradley Lumber Co. of ArkansasDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1948
  5. Club Razor Blade Mfg. Corp. v. BindzsusNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1942

4 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