Legal Opinion

Penetone Corp. v. Palchem, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Ohio

Decided November 27, 1985No. C85-3373APublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DOWD, District Judge.

Plaintiff, the Penetone Corporation (hereinafter “Penetone”), filed its complaint against the defendants, Palchem, Inc. (hereinafter “Palchem”), Carl J. Paolucci, and the Scott & Fetzer Company, d/b/a Scot Laboratories (hereinafter “Scot”) on November 12, 1985, setting forth nine causes of action. In its complaint, plaintiff alleges, inter alia: (1) that the defendant Paolucci and “his essentially alter ego,” Palchem, have violated a noncompete clause in an employment agreement between defendant Paolucci and the plaintiff; (2) that the defendant Paolucci revealed trade…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Kewanee Oil Co. v. Bicron Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. Frisch's Restaurant, Inc. v. Shoney's Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1985
  4. Pyromatics, Inc. v. PetruzielloOhio Court of Appeals · 1983
  5. Water Management, Inc. v. StayanchiOhio Supreme Court · 1984

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Kendall Holdings, Ltd. v. Eden Cryogenics LLCDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2008
  2. Winklevoss Consultants, Inc. v. Federal InsuranceDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1998
  3. ALTA Analytics, Inc. v. MuussDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1999
  4. Basicomputer Corp. v. ScottDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1991
  5. Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. v. YoderDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1997

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