California Court of Appeal

In a contract dispute over the royalty base of product sales, judgment against defendant is affirmed where it breached the agreement and its fiduciary duty by concealing and failing to pay royalties when they were due.

Appellate Information

• Decided 10/21/2004
• Published 10/21/2004

Judges

• ASHMANN-GERST, J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Howard, Rice, Nemerovski, Canady, Falk & Rabkin, Jerome B. Falk, Jr., Steven L. Mayer, Amy L. Bomse, San Francisco;  Keker & Van Nest, Robert A. Van Nest, Susan J. Harriman, Kara M. Andersen, and Steven A. Hirsch, San Francisco, for Defendant and Appellant., Fred Main for Chamber of Commerce of the United States, California Chamber of Commerce;  Jim Hawley for TechNet;  D. Bruce Sewell, Janet Craycroft for Intel Corporation;  Robin S. Conrad for National Chamber Litigation Center, Inc. and Thomas R. Lavelle, San Jose, for Xilinx, Inc. as Amici Curiae on behalf Defendant and Appellant., Horvitz & Levy, Ellis J. Horvitz, Jon B. Eisenberg, Encino, William N. Hancock, San Francisco;  Irell & Manella, Morgan Chu, Gregory R. Smith, David I. Gindler, Joseph M. Lipner, Los Angeles;  Reed, Smith, Crosby, Heafey, Peter W. Davis, San Francisco, and James C. Martin, Los Angeles, for Plaintiff and Respondent.