Legal Opinion
Ferrofluidics Corp. v. Advanced Vacuum Components, Inc.
District Court, D. New Hampshire
Decided April 22, 1992No. C-92-80-LPublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FINDINGS OF FACT AND RULINGS OF LAW
LOUGHLIN, Senior District Judge.
The procedural history of the litigation in the Federal Court for the Northern District of California and the action filed in this court is important.
Defendant Sickles signed a covenant not to compete (covenant) in New Hampshire when he was first employed by the plaintiff. Having some reservations about the legality of his incorporating Advanced Vacuum Components (AVC) in light of the agreement, Sickles received legal opinions from attorneys in Pennsylvania and California. He learned that California law looked with disfavor on…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Provident Tradesmens Bank & Trust Co. v. PattersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Mallow v. HindeSupreme Court of the United States · 1827
- Equifax Services, Inc., D/B/A Equifax Commercial Specialists F/k/a White & White Inspection and Audit Service, Inc. v. Steven A. HitzCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1990
- Francisco Pujol v. Shearson/american Express, Inc., Appeal of Ana Bonelli De PujolCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Ferrofluidics Corporation v. Advanced Vacuum Components, inc.s.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1992
- Johnson v. General Dynamics Information Technology, Inc.District Court, D. New Hampshire · 2009
- Brignull v. AlbertSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1995
- Gwynn v. TransCor America, Inc.District Court, D. Colorado · 1998
- John Hancock Property & Casualty Co. v. Hanover InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1994
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.