The plaintiffs sued Western Steel Company for patent infringement under federal law and for breach of a 1968 license and settlement agreement arising from a prior patent dispute over a front-end discharging transit concrete mixer. The court held that it had pendent jurisdiction over the related state-law claims because the federal patent claim was substantial and had not been dismissed. It granted partial summary judgment on liability, finding that the defendant breached the license by selling engineering drawings and plans to a competitor rather than returning them to the plaintiffs as required. The court awarded compensatory damages for lost profits, damages for conversion of trade secrets, and punitive damages after determining the breach was willful and malicious.
business & regulatorypropertyproceduretorts & liability
The case involved a class action by minority public stockholders of International Service Industries, Inc. against corporate insiders and others, challenging a 1974 merger in which the company was absorbed into a new entity, Body Contour, Inc. Insiders received stock in the surviving company while public shareholders were offered only cash at 18 cents per share. The court granted the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment, holding that the merger constituted a fraudulent "freeze-out" scheme under SEC Rule 10b-5 and a breach of fiduciary duties. It reasoned that the transaction lacked any legitimate corporate purpose, as evidenced by the defendants' own proxy statements, and relied on precedents such as Bryan v. Brock & Blevins Co. and Pepper v. Litton to conclude that the insiders' self-dealing violated federal securities law and corporate obligations. The court voided the merger and reserved jurisdiction over damages and class procedures.
The case involved three pregnant women receiving Medicaid benefits in Utah who sought state-funded abortions that their physicians deemed medically appropriate, but which the state refused to cover unless they qualified as 'therapeutic' (necessary to save the mother's life or prevent serious physical impairment). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and denied the defendant's, issuing an injunction against the state's requirements for prior approval and therapeutic purpose limitations on abortion payments. The core reasoning was that federal Medicaid statutes under 42 U.S.C. § 1396 require participating states to provide necessary inpatient hospital and physician services without such distinctions, that the plaintiffs had a constitutionally protected right to abortion, and that discriminating between therapeutic and non-therapeutic abortions violated equal protection principles.
The case concerns three plaintiffs—two conservation organizations and a wilderness guide—who filed a mandamus action under 28 U.S.C. § 1361 to compel the Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation and the Secretary of the Interior to prevent Glen Canyon Dam reservoir waters from entering Rainbow Bridge National Monument and to implement protective measures required by the Colorado River Storage Act. Both sides moved for summary judgment. The court examined Sections 1 and 3 of the Act, which direct the Secretary to take adequate protective measures to preclude impairment of the Monument and state Congress's intention that no dam or reservoir be located within any national park or monument, while noting that Congress had not appropriated funds for protective works.
The case Anderson v. Salt Lake City Corporation involved a challenge to a Ten Commandments monument placed on the publicly owned grounds of a courthouse, donated by the private Eagles organization but installed, illuminated, and maintained at taxpayer expense near the entrance to the Hall of Justice. The court held that the display was unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause. Its reasoning focused on the monument's explicitly religious text from the Bible, its Christian and Jewish symbols, its permanent placement in a prominent public location funded by the government, and its stated purpose of providing religious guidance to youth and adults.
The case involved a dispute between Trans-American Collections, Inc. (TAC), a collection service company, and its former regional manager Eugene Simpson, sales manager Gale Palmer, and others who formed a competing company, Continental Account Servicing House, Inc. (CASH). TAC terminated its sales agency contract with Simpson for nonperformance and disloyalty, after which Simpson and associates began competing directly with TAC in violation of a non-compete covenant in the contract. The court held that TAC properly terminated the contract due to Simpson's breaches of its terms, his duty of loyalty as an agent, and anticipatory repudiation, and that the non-compete covenant was enforceable under Colorado law as the place of contracting. It awarded TAC damages for lost profits and harm to goodwill from the breach and unfair competition, plus punitive damages against Simpson and CASH for willful conduct, and issued an injunction against further unfair competition.
