Rehabilitation Specialists, Inc. v. Koering (1987)
green
· 76 citation events
across 10 courts.
Showing the 36 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1988 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
198820072026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
Confold Pacific, Inc. v. Polaris Industries, Inc. (2006)
Rehabilitation Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 302, 306-07 (Minn.App. 1987); Tate v. Scanlan Int’l, Inc., 403 N.W.2d 666, 671-72 (Minn.App.1987); Micro Display Systems, Inc. v. Axtel, Inc., 699 F.Supp. 202, 205 (D.Minn.1988) (Minnesota law).
green
Confold Pacific Inc v. Polaris Indus Inc (2006)
Rehabilitation Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 302, 306-07 (Minn. App. 1987); Tate v. Scanlan Int’l, Inc., 403 N.W.2d 666, 671-72 (Minn. App. 1987); Micro Display Systems, Inc. v. Axtel, Inc., 699 F. Supp. 202, 205 (D.
green
Sip-Top, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation v. Ekco Group, Inc., a Delaware Corporation Ekco Housewares, Inc., a D… (1996)
Rehabilitation Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 305 (Minn.Ct.App.1987).
green
Sip-Top, Inc. v. Ekco Group, Inc. (1996)
Rehabilitation Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 305 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987).
Rehabilitation Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 304 (Minn.1987).
green
Setliff v. Akins (2000)
Rehabilitation Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 305 (Minn.Ct.App.1987). [¶ 18.] While the lack of resistance may be material, the standard of review is whether genuine issues of material fact exist within the record. [¶ 19.] In reviewing these types of cases in other jurisdictions, it is obvious that they are extremely fact-sensitive.
green
Jet Courier Service, Inc. v. Mulei (1989)
AGA Aktiebolag v. ABA Optical Corp., 441 F.Supp. 747, 754 (E.D.N.Y.1977) (by soliciting customers for rival business prior to end of his employment, employee violated his fiduciary obligations to employer); Fish v. Adams, 401 So.2d 843, 845 (Fla.App.1981) (employee may not engage in disloyal acts in anticipation of future competition such as soliciting customers prior to end of her employment); Maryland Metals, Inc. v. Metzner, 282 Md. 31 , 382 A.2d 564, 569 (1978) (it is br…
employee's duty of loyalty prohibits her from soliciting employer's customers for herself while she is employed
green
Ballast Advisors, LLC v. Peterson (2024)
Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 304 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987)).
green
ImageTrend, Inc. v. Locality Media, Inc. (2022)
Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 304 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987).
green
Haddley v. Next Chapter Technology, Inc. (2019)
Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 304 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987) (stating that the employee’s duty of loyalty prohibits an employee from competing with the employer while still employed).
stating that the employee’s duty of loyalty prohibits an employee from competing with the employer while still employed
Minnesota recognizes unfair competition as an independent cause of action. 6 See Dalco Corp. v. *644 Dixon, 338 N.W.2d 437, 441 (Minn.1983); Rehabilitation Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 305 (Minn.Ct.App.1987); Crown Holding Corp. v. Larson, 410 N.W.2d 373 (Minn.Ct.App.1987).
green
Orbital Engineering, Inc. v. Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc., Douglas M. Cabak, and Daniel Messner (2025)
Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 305 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987).
Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 304 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987) (“An employee’s duty of loyalty prohibits her from soliciting the employer’s customers for herself, or from otherwise competing with her employer, while she is employed.”).
“An employee’s duty of loyalty prohibits her from soliciting the employer’s customers for herself, or from otherwise competing with her employer, while she is employed.”
green
Core and Main, LP v. McCabe (2021)
Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 304 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987).
green
Prairie Field Services, LLC v. Welsh (2020)
Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 304 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987); see also Eaton Corp., 971 F.2d at 141 .
green
Appdiff, Inc. v. Bonine (2020)
Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 304 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987) (citing Sanitary Farm Dairies, Inc. v. Wolf, 112 N.W.2d 42 (1961)).
citing Sanitary Farm Dairies, Inc. v. Wolf, 112 N.W.2d 42 (1961)
green
Brand Advantage Group, Inc. v. Henshaw (2020)
Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 304 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987) (citing Sanitary Farm Dairies, Inc. v. Wolf, 112 N.W.2d 42 (1961)).
citing Sanitary Farm Dairies, Inc. v. Wolf, 112 N.W.2d 42 (1961)
green
Maxim Defense Industries, LLC v. Kunsky (2019)
Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 304 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987).
green
Maxim Defense Industries, LLC v. Kunsky (2019)
Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 304 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987) (noting that duty of loyalty means that an employee may not compete with his employer “while still employed”).
noting that duty of loyalty means that an employee may not compete with his employer “while still employed”
green
NICE Systems, Inc. v. Becquer (2017)
Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 304 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987) (stating that the employee’s duty of loyalty prohibits an employee from competing with the employer while still employed).
stating that the employee’s duty of loyalty prohibits an employee from competing with the employer while still employed
Rehabilitation Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 305-06 (Minn. App. 1987).
green
Sharon Anderson, Relator v. YUM Design, LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development (2016)
Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 304 (Minn. App. 1987).
Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 304 (Minn.1987).
green
Menzies Aviation, Inc. v. Wilcox (2013)
Rehabilitation Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 304 (Minn.Ct.App.1987) (citations omitted).
green
Cenveo Corp. v. Southern Graphic Systems, Inc. (2011)
Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 304 (Minn.Ct.App.1987) (stating that the employee’s duty of loyalty prohibits an employee from competing with the employer while still employed). “[A]n employee breaches the duty of loyalty, and thus engages in employment misconduct, by encouraging a third party to terminate a contract between the employer and the third party [through solicitation].” Schmidt v. Blue Lily Farms LLC, No. A 08-1398, 2009 WL 2151135 , at *2 (Minn. Ct…
green
Hot Stuff Foods, LLC v. Dornbach (2010)
Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 304 (Minn.Ct.
green
Marn v. Fairview Pharmacy Services LLC (2008)
Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 304 (Minn.App.1987) (stating that an employee’s duty of loyalty prohibits her from soliciting her employer’s customers or from otherwise competing with her employer).
United Wild Rice v. Nelson, 313 N.W.2d 628, 632 (Minn.1982); Rehabilitation Specialists v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 305 (Minn.Ct.App.1987) (describing unfair competition is a general category of torts recognized by Minnesota courts to protect commercial interests).
green
Goddard, Inc. v. Henry's Foods, Inc. (2003)
Under Minnesota law, “[ujnfair competition is not a tort with specific elements,” but rather, it “describes a general category of torts which courts recognize for the protection of commercial interests.” Rehabilitation Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 305-06 (Minn.App.1987).
green
Lens Crafters, Inc. v. Vision World, Inc. (1996)
As to the claims of unfair competition, under Minnesota law, “[u]nfair competition is not a tort with specific elements,” but rather, “it describes a general category of torts which courts recognize for the protection of commercial interests.” Zimmerman Group v. Fairmont Foods of Minnesota, 882 F.Supp. 892, 895 (D.Minn.1994), quoting Rehabilitation Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 305-06 (Minn.Ct.App.1987).
Rehabilitation Specialists v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 305 (Minn.App.1987).
“Unfair competition is not a tort with specific elements; it describes a general category of torts which courts recognize for the protection of commercial interests.” Rehabilitation Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 305-306 (Minn.Ct.App.1987).
green
Northwest Airlines v. American Airlines (1994)
Rehabilitation Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 305 (Minn.Ct.App.1987) (citing W.
See Koering, 404 N.W.2d at 304 ; Wolf, 261 Minn. at 168 , 112 N.W.2d at 44 .
green
State Ex Rel. Humphrey v. Philip Morris Inc. (2000)
Minn.Stat. § 325C.01, subd. 5(i) (1998); see Rehabilitation Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301, 306 (Minn.App.1987) (citing Minn.Stat. § 325C.01, subd. 5 (1986), and Jostens when addressing alleged misappropriation of confidential business information).
green
Coulter Corp. v. Leinert (1994)
See, e.g., Rehabilitation Specialists, Inc. v. Koering, 404 N.W.2d 301 (Minn.Ct.