In an action for breach of a noncompetition agreement restricting defendants’ ability to work with competitors, judgment for plaintiff is affirmed in part where the district court properly distinguished in its findings of fact between plaintiff’s general lost profits and profits lost on specific orders. However, judgment for plaintiff is reversed in part where certain information used by defendants did not qualify as a trade secret because plaintiff disclosed this information to its customers without reservation.
Read Southwest Stainless, LP v. Sappington, No. 08-5127
Appellate Information
Filed September 21, 2009
Judges
Opinion by Judge Lucero
Counsel
For Appellants:
Justin D. Flamm, Conner & Winters, LLP, Tulsa, OK
Timothy P. Reilly, Conner & Winters, LLP, Tulsa, OK
For Appellees:
Dinita L. James, Ford & Harrison, LLP, Phoenix, AZ
William E. Grob, Ford & Harrison, LLP, Phoenix, AZ
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
