Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Electro-Craft Corp. v. Controlled Motion, Inc., 332 N.W.2d 890.

25 citing documents.

Bruber Financial Services, Inc. d/b/a Persolvent, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Minnesota courts interpret an injunction consistent with its purpose, -68 (Minn. App. 2001), and avoid a construction that “would render the injunction meaningless,” Electro-Craft Corp. v. Controlled Motion, Inc.
Casey Michael Dynan, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
See Electro-Craft Corp. v. Controlled Motion, Inc.
Sunlight Senior Living I LLC, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Electro-Craft Corp. v. Controlled Motion, Inc.
Donald Dean Oberfoell, individually and Do-Bid Holdings, LLC, d/b/a Do-Bid Online Auctions, Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Electro-Craft Corp. v. Controlled Motion, Inc.
Hearing Associates, Inc., Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
as to information which the employer has treated as secret.” Electro-Craft Corp. v. Controlled Motion, Inc.
Dexon Computer, Inc. v. Modern Enterprise Solutions, Inc., Timothy Durant Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Dexon Computer, Inc. v. Modern Enterprise Solutions, Inc., Timothy Durant Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Electro-Craft Corp. v. Controlled Motion, Inc.
Excel Manufacturing, Inc. v. Todd Wondrow Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Excel Manufacturing, Inc. v. Todd Wondrow Minn. Ct. App. 2016
See Electro-Craft Corp. v. Controlled Motion, Inc., (concluding that district court findings of “trade secrets in the general ‘design procedures’ for [a] brushless motor” lacked sufficient specificity and that “[t]his lack of clarity is fatal to [plaintiff’s] claim”); see also Luigino’s, Inc. v. Peterson, 317 F.3d 909, 912 (8th Cir. 2003) (concludi
Rotary Systems, Inc. v. TomoTherapy Incorporated, Dynamic Sealing Technologies, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Rotary Systems, Inc. v. TomoTherapy Incorporated, Dynamic Sealing Technologies, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Electro-Craft Corp. v. Controlled Motion, Inc.
Hagen v. Burmeister & Associates, Inc. 633 N.W.2d 497 Minn. 2001
Hagen v. Burmeister & Associates, Inc. 633 N.W.2d 497 Minn. 2001
Co., 42 F.3d 1292, 1295 (9th Cir.1994) (noting that misappropriation of trade secrets is a tort claim); World Wide Prosthetic Supply, (stating that misappropriation of trade secrets in violation of the Wisconsin UTSA is a tort); see also Electro-Craft Corp. v. Controlled Motion, Inc., -99 (Minn.1983) (tracing the history of the common law claim of misappropriation of trade secrets, and noting that this court adopted the Restatement of Torts four-prong test for determining whether information is
Widmark v. Northrup King Co. 530 N.W.2d 588 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Widmark v. Northrup King Co. 530 N.W.2d 588 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Electro-Craft Corp. v. Controlled Motion, Inc.
Bellboy Seafood Corp. v. Nathanson 410 N.W.2d 349 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Bellboy Seafood Corp. v. Nathanson 410 N.W.2d 349 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
II The trial court granted summary judgment dismissing the claim of misappropriation of trade secrets, concluding that Bellboy had not taken the reasonable efforts to maintain secrecy required by Electro-Craft Corp. v. Controlled Motion, Inc., pet.
Electro-Craft Corp. v. Controlled Motion, Inc. 370 N.W.2d 465 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Electro-Craft Corp. v. Controlled Motion, Inc. 370 N.W.2d 465 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Electro-Craft Corporation v. Controlled Motion, Inc.
Aries Information Systems, Inc. v. Pacific Management Systems Corp. 366 N.W.2d 366 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Aries Information Systems, Inc. v. Pacific Management Systems Corp. 366 N.W.2d 366 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Electro-Craft Corporation v. Controlled Motion, Inc.
Saliterman v. Finney 361 N.W.2d 175 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Saliterman v. Finney 361 N.W.2d 175 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
See Electro-Craft Corp. v. Controlled Motion, Inc.
Gordon Employment, Inc. v. Jewell 356 N.W.2d 738 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Gordon Employment, Inc. v. Jewell 356 N.W.2d 738 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
§§ 325C.01-325C.08 (1982)