KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, N. V. v. De Wit

70 A.D.2d 867, 418 N.Y.S.2d 63, 5 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1335, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12435
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 28, 1979
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 70 A.D.2d 867 (KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, N. V. v. De Wit) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, N. V. v. De Wit, 70 A.D.2d 867, 418 N.Y.S.2d 63, 5 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1335, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12435 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Opinion

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered April 3, 1979, which granted the plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction, [868]*868restraining the defendant, except as to governmental agencies investigating the conduct in question, from disclosing trade secret or confidential information or data obtained from the files of plaintiff, his former employer, or to which he had become privy during the course of his employment, and defining the words "trade secret”, modified, on the law and the facts and in the exercise of discretion, by deleting the words "confidential information or data”, wherever they appear in the second decretal paragraph, and further to eliminate the third decretal paragraph defining "trade secret”, and otherwise affirmed, without costs. The defendant, a former employee of the plaintiff, admittedly furnished to news media information about the plaintiff to which he was privy solely as a result of his employment. The court at Special Term defined the words "trade secret” to include information so released. This definition impinges upon the First Amendment restraints and extends beyond the usual, established legal protection afforded, in prohibiting revelation of information used in business, which in the hands of a competitor would be either detrimental or give the competitor an added advantage. This court has heretofore granted an interim stay of the order to the extent of striking the definition of "trade secret” therein and the provisions with respect to "confidential information or data”. Our modification is in accordance with the terms of the interim stay so that the preliminary injunction applies only to the traditional "trade secret” area. Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Birns, Sandler and Lane, JJ. [98 Misc 2d 946.]

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Stanley Tulchin Associates, Inc. v. Vignola
186 A.D.2d 183 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
Q-Co Industries, Inc. v. Hoffman
625 F. Supp. 608 (S.D. New York, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
70 A.D.2d 867, 418 N.Y.S.2d 63, 5 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1335, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12435, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/klm-royal-dutch-airlines-n-v-v-de-wit-nyappdiv-1979.