Law Practice,
Labor/Employment,
Ethics/Professional Responsibility,
California Supreme Court
Aug. 11, 2017
Latham evades malicious prosecution liability in high court ruling
A trade secret lawsuit found to be in bad faith does not necessarily create malicious prosecution liability for the lawyer who brought the case, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
A trade secret lawsuit found to be in bad faith does not necessarily create malicious prosecution liability for the lawyer who brought the case, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
In a victory for Latham & Watkins LLP that closes perhaps the final chapter in an 11-year feud over lucrative infared technology, Justice Leondra Kruger wrote a unanimous opinion that found Latham deserves the benefit of the doubt.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$895, but save $100 when you subscribe today… Just $795 for the first year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In