Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)

Citation: Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Parent Document: Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 1952-02-08
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1138834/findley-v-garrett/ ↗

Other Sections in This Document (69)

Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)

Full Text

540 chars

The said acts constituted a violation of defendants’ fiduciary duties to Douglas because Garrett’s profits were derived by interfering with Douglas transactions, selling products to Douglas at secret and unconscionable profits, exploiting the normal business and the experimental research and inventions of Douglas. The secret profits which were distributed through Garrett to directors of Douglas and other aircraft companies destroy competition, violate the Fair Trade Practices Act, and are fraudulent as to Douglas and its stockholders.