Legal Opinion
SASCO v. Rosendin Electric, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 11, 2012No. G045229PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
IKOLA, J.
Plaintiff SASCO appeals a postjudgment order awarding defendants1 $484,943.46 in attorney fees and costs pursuant to Civil Code section 3426.4 (section 3426.4). We affirm. The trial court applied the correct interpretation of section 3426.4 and did not abuse its discretion in finding “bad faith” on the part of SASCO in bringing its trade secret misappropriation claim against defendants.
FACTS
Allegations in Complaint
SASCO filed its complaint on July 31, 2008. We briefly describe the factual allegations contained therein, specifying where SASCO made allegations based upon…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Reeves v. HanlonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
- Yield Dynamics, Inc. v. TEA Systems Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2007
- Daniels v. RobbinsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- Smith v. Selma Community HospitalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- FLIR Systems, Inc. v. ParrishCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Tradesmen International, Incor v. John BlackCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2013
- Cypress Semiconductor Corp. v. Maxim Integrated Products, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2015
- Conxall Corporation v. Iconn Systems, LLCAppellate Court of Illinois · 2016
- AWP, Inc. v. Safe Zone Services, LLCDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 2022
- Aerotek v. Johnson Group Staffing Co.California Court of Appeal · 2020
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.