Topic: this doctrine is contrary to california law and policy beca… · Go Syfert
← All topics

Topic #45699

2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 6 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Whyte v. Schlage Lock Company.

#Case FlagCanonical passage Citers
1 Whyte v. Schlage Lock Company Anchor
calctapp · 2002
green “this doctrine is contrary to california law and policy because it creates an after-the-fact covenant not to compete restricting employee mobility.” 3
2 Roger Cleveland Golf Co. v. Krane & Smith, APC
calctapp · 2014
green “the applicable statute of limitations for malicious prosecution is code of civil procedure section 335.1, irrespective of whether the party being sued for malicious prosecution is the former adversary . . . or the adversary's attorneys . . . .” 3

A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.

← Caselaw search · Hot / Trending / Newly red · Brief Check