Court Opinion

ID: 9580028
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 22:01:07.295363+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:35:58.986167
License: Public Domain

White, J.
(concurring in part and dissenting in part). I dissent in part from the affirmance of the *383grant of summary disposition because I believe there are genuine issues of material fact regarding plaintiffs claims concerning the period between June 1989 and the sale of assets to Rite-Made Chemical Company in November 1989. There was evidence that during this period R.M. Service Company, Inc., began manufacturing products using the same product formulas and names as Maintenance Research Laboratories, Inc., and began selling to Maintenance’s customers, although R.M. Service Company, Inc., never produced or sold these products before.
I would remand the case for further proceedings, including appropriate discovery, regarding the period beginning June 1989 and ending with the sale of assets to Rite-Made.
In all other respects, I concur in the majority opinion.