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
Daniel R. Miller
(Walden, Macht & Haran LLP)
Anthony J. Oncidi
(Proskauer Rose LLP)
Defendant
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.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390