Cited by

This equitable defense is “premised on withholding judicial assistance from a party 9 guilty of illegal or unconscionable conduct.” Medtronic

It is true that the doctrine of unclean hands prohibits a party who acts illegally or unconscionably from receiving equitable relief , Medtronic, and it is true that the district court declared that “there’s nobody here who’s got clean hands through this.” But the district court immediately contextualized its declaration, explaining, “I mean, 10 everybody doesn’t like each other.” We interpret these statements in context to mean that

“This factor is designed to ensure that Minnesota courts do not have to apply rules of law that are ‘inconsistent with Minnesota’s concept of fairness and equity.’” Schumacher, d at 691 (quoting Medtronic, ).

Jepson, d at 469; see also Medtronic, (identifying difference between states’ laws in enforcement of noncompete agreements as an actual conflict).

“The factor applies primarily to consensual transactions where the parties desire advance notice of which state law will govern in future disputes.” Medtronic

Generally, a clerical mistake “is apparent upon the face of the record and capable of being corrected by reference to the record only.” Medtronic, (quoting Wilson v. City of Fergus Falls, 232 N.W.

Medtronic, Inc. v. Advanced Bionics Corp.

“Judicial comity is the respect a court of one state or jurisdiction shows to another state or jurisdiction in giving effect to the other’s laws and judicial decisions.” Medtronic, (quotation omitted).

Medtronic, –49 (Minn. App. 2001).

Advancement of the Forum’s Governmental Interest This factor relates to which law would “most effectively advance a ‘significant interest of the forum’ state.” Medtronic, (quoting Jepson, d at 472) .

“Judicial comity is the respect a court of one state or jurisdiction shows to another state or jurisdiction in giving effect to the other’s laws and judicial decisions.” Medtronic, Inc. v. Advanced Bionics Corp. , (quotation omitted).

The fourth factor, the interest of the forum, concerns which state’s law “would most effectively advance a significant interest of the forum state.” Medtronic, (quotation omitted).

Medtronic, Inc. v. Advanced Bionics Corp. , , 448-49 (Minn. App. 2001).

Medtronic, Inc. v. Advanced Bionics Corp ., (citation omitted); see also Bennett v. Storz Broadcasting Co. , d 892, 898 (Minn. 1965) (“[T]his court has uniformly upheld coven ants in a contract of employment designed .

Legitimate in terests that may be protected include the company’s goodwill, trad e secrets, and confidential information.” Medtronic, (citation omitted).

We do not reverse a district court’s decision on a motion for an anti-suit injunction “absent a clear abuse of discretion.” Medtronic

Legitimate in terests that may be protected include the company’s goodwill, trad e secrets, and confidential information.” Medtronic, Inc. v. Advanced Bionics Corp.

“The party seeking an injunction must demonstrate that there is no 5 adequate legal remedy and that the injunction is necessary to prevent irreparable harm.” Medtronic

7 jurisdiction generally has priority to decide the case.” Medtronic, -49 (Minn. App. 2001).

See Medtronic, (recognizing that, even if the employee did not confiscate internal company documents, “the knowledge he gained while working with Medtronic’s customers gives him insight into customer preferences”).

“The first-filed rule provides that where two courts have concurrent jurisdiction, the first to acquire jurisdiction generally has priority to decide the case.” Medtronic, Inc. 5 v. Advanced Bionics Corp., -49 (Minn. App. 2001).

See Medtronic, (noting that the defense of “unclean hands” is based on “withholding judicial assistance from a party guilty of illegal or unconscionable conduct” (emphasis added)).

See Medtronic, 454 (Minn. App.2001) (stating that Minnesota courts give effect to the parties’ choice of law in a contract).

“In deciding whether to defer to another court, a district court considers judicial economy, comity between courts, and the cost to and the convenience of the litigants....” Medtronic, see also First State Ins.