General automotive manufacturing co v singer
WebGeneral Automotive Manufacturing Co. v. Singer: Singer decided that Automotive lacked the necessary facilities to fill orders at a competitive price. Singer then secretly took orders himself, contracted with a rival machine shop to do the work, and kept the difference between the price he quoted and the amount he paid the machine shop. WebGENERAL AUTOMOTIVE MFG. CO. v. SINGER. Action commenced by General Automotive Manufacturing Company, hereinafter referred to as "Automotive," against John Singer, a former employee, to account for secret profits received while in its employ. Trial was to the court without a jury, which found defendant liable to plaintiff for …
General automotive manufacturing co v singer
Did you know?
WebSummary: Singer was employed by General Automotive Manufacturing Company (GAMC) as its general manager from 1953 until 1959. He had worked in the machine … WebSinger was employed by General Automotive Manufacturing Company (GAMC) as its general manager from 1953 until 1959. He had worked in the machine-shop field for …
WebSummary: Singer was employed by General Automotive Manufacturing Company (GAMC) as its general manager from 1953 until 1959. He had worked in the machine …
WebSinger was employed by General Automotive Manufacturing Company (GAMC) as its general manager from 1953 until 1959. He had worked in the machine-shop field for … WebThe General Automotive court concluded that Singer was liable to Automotive, reasoning: Rather than to resolve the conflict of interest between his sideline business and …
Webx TABLE OF CONTENTS Analysis .....67 E. Estoppel .....68
WebSinger was employed by General Automotive Manufacturing Company (GAMC) as its general manager from 1953 until 1959. He had worked in the machine-shop field for … oth to phxWebApr 16, 1980 · Guth v. Loft, Inc., supra. 3 Fletcher, Cyclopedia Corporations (Perm.Ed.1975) § 861.1. See General Automotive Manufacturing Company v. Singer, Wis.Supr., 120 N.W.2d 659, 663 (1963) stating, "The doctrine of corporate opportunity is a species of the duty of a fiduciary to act with undivided loyalty." othtrackWebStudy with Quizlet and memorize flashcards terms like Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010), A.P. Smith Mfg. Co. v. Barlow (1953), Public Benefit Corporations and more. oth to denWebSinger (defendant), was formerly employed at General Automotive Manufacturing Co. (Automotive) (plaintiff), holding the title of general manager of operations. When he … rock paper scissors perry hall mdWebJustia › US Law › Case Law › Wisconsin Case Law › Wisconsin Court of Appeals Decisions › 2009 › InfoCorp, LLC v. Christopher Hunt Christopher Hunt InfoCorp, LLC v. oth to sfoWebGeneral Automotive Manufacturing Co. v. Singer. a general manger has a duty to disclose and receive consent from the principal before pursuing a ... Newberry. an employee of a cleaning company may prepare to compete in the future while employed; however, the employee may NOT directly compete with the principal for the principal's customers. ... oth timelineWebHumble Oil & Refining Co. & Sun Oil Company 9. Bushey v. United States 10. Manning v. Grimsley 10. D. Fiduciary Duties in the Agency Relationship 10. Reading v. Regem 11. General Automotive Manufacturing Co. v. Singer 11. E. Termination of Authority and the Agency Relationship 12. II. General Partnerships 13 rock paper scissors pinner