Collateral Contracts Rule Explained
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 12.30.05
In Mann v. U.S. (Dec. 7, 2005), the Court of Federal Claims rejected a broad reading of the rule that lost profits are not allowed under contracts collateral to the contract actually breached, explaining that when the lost profits directly relate to the subject of the contract they are recoverable, even if they would have required a transaction with a third party. In this breach of a lease agreement, assuming adequate proof, the contractor is able to recover the lost profits he would have made from releasing the property, as well as certain out-of-pocket costs to improve the property.
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
