You Makes Your Choice And Takes Your Chances
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 05.30.06
The Federal Circuit in the Winstar -related case of Old Stone Corp. v. U.S. (May 25, 2006) struck down a $118 million restitutionary damages award to the bank, explaining that, because the bank decided to continue operating after the breach occurred, attempting to make a go of it despite the government's breach, it had waived its right to declare a "total breach" and collect restitutionary damages to put it back in the pre-contracting situation when it went under several years later. On the other hand, foreseeable damages directly related to mitigating the effects of the breach, in this case $74.5 million, were available, and that part of the judgment was affirmed.
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.15.26
Kansas Federal Court Applies “Selective Enforcement” Theory to Reject DTSA Claim
A Kansas federal court held that inconsistent enforcement of trade secret rights can defeat a claim under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA). In Edelman Financial Engines, LLC v. Mariner Wealth Advisors LLC, No. 2:23-cv-02515-HLT (D. Kan. June 5, 2026), the court applied a selective enforcement theory, holding that when a company does not consistently pursue legal remedies against similarly situated former employees, that inconsistency can be affirmative evidence that it failed to protect its trade secrets. While the selective enforcement theory has appeared in academic hypothetical discussions, the decision appears to be one of the clearest judicial applications of a “selective enforcement” theory in a trade secret case.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.12.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26
Auto Dealers: The FTC Is Back in the Driver’s Seat — Warning Letters Signal Renewed Federal Scrutiny
Client Alert | 13 min read | 06.12.26
