![]() It reasoned that those claims were preempted by TUTSA. The trial court granted the motion and dismissed Ram Tool’s common law breach of fiduciary duty claims. Seizing on federal case law wherein common law claims which arose from the misappropriation of trade secrets were dismissed because they were held to be preempted by TUTSA, the defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. It did set forth a common law claim for breach of fiduciary duty. Ram Tool’s fourth and final amended complaint did not set forth any cause of action under TUTSA (for some inexplicable reason). It also alleged that Pruitt, with the participation, inducement and encouragement of White Cap, had, while he was employed by Ram Tool, breached his fiduciary duties to Ram Tool by attempting to recruit Ram Tool employees to go to work for White Cap. Ram Tool alleged that Pruitt, with the knowledge and participation of White Cap, used information which would be considered trade secrets to help White Cap gain a competitive advantage and that Pruitt funneled that information to White Cap so that it could do the same. Pruitt’s and White Cap’s alleged conduct was pretty despicable for anyone with even a modicum of business ethics. To that end, it recruited Pruitt to help it which he did all the while being employed by Ram Tool. White Cap, which operated in Alabama, desired to start a branch in Nashville. Pruitt’s position at Ram Tool, it is apparent that he was employed at the managerial level. Ram Tool, the plaintiff, was based in Nashville and employed a Mr. The Ram Tool case involved two competing construction supply companies. This was possible where a plaintiff could set up separate causes of action such as, for example, conversion and breach of fiduciary duty, and base them both on the same facts related to trade secret misappropriation. One reason Tennessee adopted the Uniform Trade Secrets Act was to prevent a plaintiff from recovering twice for the same act of trade secret misappropriation. To be considered a trade secret: (1) the information must be valuable because it is not known and is kept secret (2) the information must have economic value to others if they were to have it and (3) efforts must have been made to keep the information secret. TUTSA allows a business (or an individual) to file a lawsuit and to recover damages where its trade secrets have been misappropriated. ![]() ![]() Before going into the facts of the case, let’s review what TUTSA protects and why it was enacted in 2000 by the Tennessee legislature. HD Supply, the Court of Appeals of Tennessee adopted a rule which sets forth the circumstances under which a common law breach of fiduciary duty claim will be preempted by the Tennessee Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“TUTSA”). In the recent case of Ram Tool & Supply Company, Inc.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |