This Casenote examines the recent California Court of Appeals decision in Intel Corp. v. Hamidi and argues that by departing from the strict common law requirements and upholding a permanent injunction on the grounds of trespass to chattels, the court destroyed the elements and reasons that underlie the tort of trespass to chattels, in essence creating a new tort. The author argues that in doing so the court rejected the traditional definition of trespass to chattels and paved the way for absurd judicial results that have the potential to result in enormous adverse consequences.
Intel Corp. v. Hamidi: Tresspas to Chattels, the Internet's Greatest Antagonist?,
San Diego L. Rev.
Available at: https://digital.sandiego.edu/sdlr/vol40/iss1/13