Opinion

Hoeltke v. C. M. Kemp Mfg. Co.

  • 80 F.2d 912
  • 26 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 114
  • 1936 U.S. App. LEXIS 3300
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Filed
Jan 10, 1936
Status
Published
Author
Soper
On the bench
Soper, Parker, Circl'D, Hayes
Cited by
149 cases

finding that obligation of confidentiality was implied in negotiations over possible patent license for invention still in pre-mar-keting development stage, despite absence of explicit promise of confidentiality

How later courts described this case

  • finding that obligation of confidentiality was implied in negotiations over possible patent license for invention still in pre-mar-keting development stage, despite absence of explicit promise of confidentiality
  • finding that confidential relationship was implied “in equity and good conscience” where plaintiff disclosed unpatented invention to defendant in contemplation of sale
  • confidential relationship implied where plaintiff disclosed invention to defendant in contemplation of sale
  • equitable remedies available against one who misappropriates ideas of another and profits thereby

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

SOPER, Circuit Judge.

I adhere to my dissent previously filed.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.