![]() ![]() 1 Although the sale of AR-15 style rifles has been prohibited in the State of Maryland since October 1, 2013, CR §4-303 PS §5-101(r)(2)(xv) Kolbe v. That’s where Adcor came into the picture. Beretta could have invested the time and money necessary to reverse engineer and design its own AR-15-style product, but it was looking for a shortcut into the market. In 2012, Beretta was looking to enter the market for the AR15, the most popular semi-automatic rifle in the United States. Corporation (“Beretta”) is a Maryland company that designs, manufactures, and sells firearms, shooting gear, accessories, bags, luggage, holsters, optics, and apparel. Adcor spent the next several years, and incurred $12 million in research and development costs, building an AR15 platform rifle known as the “Adcor B.E.A.R.” 1 The Adcor B.E.A.R. From that experience, Adcor concluded that it had the know-how and experience to build a better firearm that could be used by police and the military. Adcor’s foray into the firearms manufacturing business began when it was hired by Colt Manufacturing to produce a component to the M-16 rifle. Adcor was founded in 1989 by Demetrios (“Jimmy”) Stavrakis when he was 23 years old. (together, “Adcor”) are Baltimore-based Maryland corporations in the business of designing and manufacturing bottling components, aerospace parts, and firearms. BACKGROUND Appellants Adcor Industries, Inc. The disclosing party appealed, and presents us with a single question: Did the trial court err by improperly granting Appellee’s Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict, vacating the jury’s damages award in favor of Appellants and entering judgment in the amount of one dollar? We answer that question in the negative and affirm the judgment of the circuit court. The trial judge, however, found that the evidence did not support the jury’s finding of damages, and reduced the judgment from $20 million to $1. The jury found the receiving party liable to the disclosing party in the amount of $20 million in compensatory damages. This case involves the fallout when the recipient of the information-the receiving party under the NDA-decided not to proceed with the contemplated transaction with the disclosing party, and then breached the NDA by failing to return all of the information it had received. Among other things, NDAs generally limit the disclosure of the sensitive information to a defined circle of people and specify its permitted uses. To facilitate the sharing of information, it is common for parties to enter into an agreement known as a nondisclosure agreement or an NDA. Such information often includes financial data and records, business plans, marketing plans, budgets, technical data, formulas, and the like. Johnson, Clerk The ability of businesses to exchange information, particularly confidential and proprietary information, is a critical component of a functioning, free-market based economy. of the State Government Article) this document is authentic. _ Filed: ApPursuant to Maryland Uniform Electronic Legal Materials Act (§§ 10-1601 et seq. 0118 September Term, 2019 _ ADCOR INDUSTRIES, INC., ET AL. Circuit Court for Baltimore County Case No.: 03-C-15-006837 REPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. CONTRACTS – NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS - DAMAGES The settled measure of contract damages under Maryland law serves its function for nondisclosure agreements as much as it does for other contracts. The allocation of risk reflected in nondisclosure agreements is just as important and central to the expectations of the parties as it is with respect to other types of contracts. CONTRACTS – NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS - DAMAGES Damages for the breach of a nondisclosure agreement are treated in the same manner as other contracts. Parties enter into contracts with the reasonable expectation that the courts will enforce those rules. If they decide to proceed, it means that they accepted all risks and mutually agreed to the rules governing their relationship moving forward. Before signing a contract, the parties must assess whether the expected benefits of the transaction outweigh the risks, including the possibility that they underestimated or failed to protect against all of the risks. The risks of signing a contract are many and often unforeseen. 118, September Term, 2019, Argued: SeptemCONTRACTS – NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS Contracts are voluntary undertakings that obligate the parties to duties and responsibilities that they otherwise wouldn’t have assumed. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |