Legal Opinion
Moss, Adams & Co. v. Shilling
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 26, 1986No. A029164PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KING, J.
In this case we hold that professional employees of an accounting firm, as a matter of law, did not engage in unfair competition when they used a company rolodex to obtain the addresses of clients of the firm for whom they had provided professional services, in order to mail those clients an announcement of their formation of a new accounting partnership. The mailing of such an announcement does not constitute solicitation and therefore is not unfair competition.
On appeal from a final judgment Moss, Adams & Company (hereafter Moss Adams) challenges a summary adjudication order…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hollingsworth Solderless Terminal Co., a Corporation v. William Turley, an Individual and Hoffman Electronics Corporation, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
- Continental Car-Na-Var Corp. v. MoseleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Aetna Building Maintenance Co. v. WestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
- Peerless Pattern Co. v. Pictorial Review Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1911
- Avocado Sales Co. v. WyseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Morlife, Inc. v. PerryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
- Scott v. Snelling and Snelling, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 1990
- American Credit Indemnity Co. v. SacksCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
- In Re Providian Credit Card CasesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
- American Paper & Packaging Products, Inc. v. KirganCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.