Archives

Case of the Day: Midbrook Flowerbulbs Holland v. Holland America Bulb Farms

The case of the day is Midbrook Flowerbulbs Holland BV v. Holland America Bulb Farms, Inc. (W.D. Wash. 2014). Midbrook was a Dutch company that sold flower bulbs to Holland America. When a dispute arose, the parties stopped doing business in May 2000, and Midbrook later claimed that Holland Farms had failed to pay it for the 1999 harvest. Midbrook sued in the Netherlands. Holland America appeared and defended, and it asserted a counterclaim alleging that Midbrook had overcharged it. After a hearing, the Dutch court ordered Holland Farms to pay Midbrook more than $1 million, plus fees and costs. Holland Farms appealed, and the Amsterdam Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment for the most part, though it reduced the damages to approximately $960,000. The Dutch Supreme Court affirmed, and Midbrook sought recognition and enforcement of the judgment of the Amsterdam Court of Appeals in Washington State.
Continue reading Case of the Day: Midbrook Flowerbulbs Holland v. Holland America Bulb Farms

Case of the Day: Cascade Yarns v. Knitting Fever

The case of the day is Cascade Yarns, Inc. v. Knitting Fever, Inc. (W.D. Wash. 2014). The claim in the case was for mislabeling of Knitting Fever’s yarns as to country of origin. Cascade wanted to take document discovery and depositions of the distributors of the accused yarn in Italy and Spain. Both Italy and Spain are parties to the Hague Evidence Convention, and both have made Article 23 declarations.
Continue reading Case of the Day: Cascade Yarns v. Knitting Fever

Case of the Day: Beijing Zhongyi Zhongbiao Electronic Information Technology Co. v. Microsoft

The case of the day is Beijing Zhongyi Zhongbiao Electronic Information Technology Co. v. Microsoft Corp. (W.D. Wash. 2013). In 1995, Microsoft and the Chinese government signed a memorandum of understanding, under which Microsoft was to develop a Chinese version of Windows 95 using fonts that met the government’s standards, and the government undertook to help procure the fonts. Later, Microsoft, the Chinese government, and Zhongyi entered into a license agreement under which Microsoft received a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide license to use Zhongyi fonts.
Continue reading Case of the Day: Beijing Zhongyi Zhongbiao Electronic Information Technology Co. v. Microsoft