Garlock, Inc. v. United Seal Incorporated, 18509.
| Decision Date | 20 December 1968 |
| Docket Number | No. 18509.,18509. |
| Citation | 404 F.2d 256 |
| Parties | GARLOCK, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED SEAL INCORPORATED, Thomas M. Loring, Jack A. Bush, Edward E. Blaurock and Benjamin W. Thoms, Defendants-Appellees, Republic Industrial Corporation, Auxiliary Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
W. Gerald Warren, Detroit, Mich., for appellant; Dickinson, Wright, McKean & Cudlip, Fred W. Freeman, George B. Martin, Detroit, Mich., on brief.
Don K. Harness, Detroit, Mich., for appellees; Lyman R. Lyon, Harness, Dickey & Pierce, Detroit, Mich., on brief.
Before WEICK, Chief Judge, and PHILLIPS and EDWARDS, Circuit Judges.
This appeal is from an order of the District Court denying plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction.
The action in the District Court was for damages and injunctive relief. The complaint, filed in July, 1967, contained three counts alleging violation of the Sherman Act, breach of fiduciary duty, and unfair competition. The motion for preliminary injunction was to restrain defendants from manufacturing and selling automotive and railroad oil seals made from molds, designs or compounds alleged to be trade secrets of plaintiff, and from exploitation of plaintiff's corporate opportunity to make and sell helix seals.
The individual defendants at one time were employed in executive capacities by Michigan Precision Molded, Inc. (MPM), a Michigan corporation engaged in the manufacture of oil seals, with its factory located at Walled Lake, Michigan. Garlock, Inc. purchased MPM in 1964. It experienced labor difficulties and therefore determined to and did move its plant to Gastonia, North Carolina. When the individual defendants learned of the plan to move the plant, they resigned from Garlock and formed United Seal, Inc., a Michigan corporation, in 1965, and engaged in the manufacture of oil seals in competition with Garlock, and with the assistance of a number of former employees of MPM or Garlock. Republic Industrial Corporation later acquired all of the issued and outstanding shares of stock of United Seal.
The District Judge conducted an extensive evidentiary hearing on the motion for preliminary injunction, which lasted thirteen days. He considered 162 exhibits and wrote a memorandum opinion denying the motion, which appears on 14 of the 1839 pages of transcript. He found that plaintiff had failed to establish irreparable injury and probability of success on a trial of the merits. Balancing the rights of the parties, the Court found that damages would be adequate to compensate plaintiff if...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bd. of Educ. of the Highland Local Sch. Dist. v. U.S. Dep't of Educ.
...injury and of convincing the Court that the balance of injury favor[s] the granting of the injunction." Garlock, Inc. v. United Seal, Inc. , 404 F.2d 256, 257 (6th Cir.1968) (per curiam).III. HIGHLAND'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION At the outset, Defendants contend that the Court lacks......
-
Bongo Prods., LLC v. Lawrence
...establish at least a meaningful "[p]robability of success" in order for a preliminary injunction to issue.7 Garlock, Inc. v. United Seal Inc. , 404 F.2d 256, 257 (6th Cir. 1968) ; see also Golf Vill. N. LLC v. City of Powell, Ohio , 333 F. Supp. 3d 769, 775 (S.D. Ohio 2018). The defendants ......
-
MATTER OF CLAWSON MEDICAL, REHABILITATION
...prevail on the merits. Doran v. Sabin Inn, Inc., 422 U.S. 922, 931, 95 S.Ct. 2561, 2567, 45 L.Ed.2d 648 (1975). Garlock, Inc. v. United Seal, Inc., 404 F.2d 256 (6th Cir. 1968). Issuance of a preliminary injunction to preserve the status quo is appropriate "when the record shows that irrepa......
-
Alameda Conservation Association v. State of Cal.
...likelihood or reasonable certainty that they will ultimately prevail which would justify the grant of a writ. Garlock, Inc. v. United Seal, Inc., 404 F.2d 256, 257 (6th Cir. 1968). We therefore agree with the action taken by the district court in discharging the orders to show cause and we ......