This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Intellectual Property
Trade Secret Misappropriation
Invasion of Privacy

Aaron Mintz v. Mark Bartelstein and Associates Inc., et al.

Published: Jul. 13, 2013 | Result Date: Jun. 14, 2013 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 2:12-cv-02554-SVW-SS (2:12-cv-03055-SVW-SS) Summary Judgment –  Counter defendant

Court

USDC Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Christopher Williams

Susan Gutierrez

Daniel R. Miller
(Walden, Macht & Haran LLP)

Skip Miller

Anthony J. Oncidi
(Proskauer Rose LLP)

Robert Einhorn


Defendant

Paul B. Salvaty

Christopher Dacus

G. Jill Bassinger

Patricia L. Glaser
(Glaser Weil Fink Howard Avchen & Shapiro LLP )


Facts

Plaintiff Aaron Mintz resigned from Priority Sports & Entertainment to join Creative Artists Agency (CAA), a competing sports agency. Mintz filed suit against Priority Sports, seeking a declaration that the non-compete clause of his employment contract was unenforceable. Mintz also filed a separate complaint alleging that after his resignation, Priority Sports had engaged in a course of illegal retaliation and that Priority Sports violated California Penal Code Section section 502 by hacking into Mintz's personal Gmail account.

Priority Sports filed a counterclaim alleging that Mintz and CAA had conspired to improperly solicit Priority Sports' clients and had misappropriated Priority Sports' trade secrets.

On Nov. 1, 2012, the district court granted CAA and Mintz's motion for summary judgment on all of Priority Sports' counterclaims. The court found that there was no evidence of any misappropriation of trade secrets.

The court also granted Mintz's affirmative summary judgment motion and found that Priority Sports violated California Penal Code Section section 502 and invaded Mintz's privacy. Specifically, the court found that at "the direction of Priority Sport's senior counsel [Rick Smith] . . . Priority Sports knowingly and without permission used a computer to wrongfully obtain data" in violation of section 502 of the California Penal Code. The court also found that Priority Sports invaded Mintz's privacy by hacking into his Gmail account.

A jury trial was held on Mintz's damages for Priority Sports' invasion of privacy and violation of section 502 of the California Penal Code. On Nov. 14, 2012, the jury awarded Mintz $85,000 for emotional distress damages for Priority Sports' email hacking.

CAA then moved to recover its attorney fees on the grounds that Priority Sports had pursued its counterclaim for misappropriation of trade secrets in bad faith.

Result

The court ruled that Priority Sports maintained its trade secret misappropriation claim in bad faith and that CAA was entitled to recover its attorney fees from Priority Sports.The trial award to Mintz was $85,000.


#91553

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390