Not exact matches
It may be proper for a judge (or his or her clerk) to check whether counsel have referred to all the relevant
cases but, if they have not, and the judge finds one that he or she thinks may dispose of the issue, it is
strongly arguable, whether the omission to cite the
case is the fault of counsel or not, that the judge should call counsel back and invite them to address arguments to the court to deal with the new
case.
It seems to me
strongly arguable that in the circumstances of a
case such as this, where the employer discovers that the employee has been in serious breach of duty and in breach of good faith, and then discovers that the employee is tied effectively to a rival already... then the employer has, even if he keeps the contract alive, no obligation to provide work; that obligation to provide work being interdependent with the obligation of the employee to act loyally.»
In other
cases, in an
arguable violation of state «little anti-trust acts», there is a tie - in violation in which lawyer members of these mixed practice groups insist (or merely
strongly encourage) clients to hire both legal counsels and these other professionals from the same advertising «roster» including all of them as «equal practitioners».