Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Share your feedback on this Case Opinion Preview

Thank You For Submiting Feedback!

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

  • Case Opinion

Morlife, Inc. v. Perry

Morlife, Inc. v. Perry

Court of Appeal of California, First Appellate District, Division Two

August 14, 1997, Decided ; August 14, 1997

No. A074958.

Opinion

 [*1517]  [**733]   [****1742]  RUVOLO, J. 

Respondent Morlife, Inc. (Morlife) brought this suit for damages and injunctive relief against its former employees, appellants Lloyd Perry and Carl Bowersmith, who had resigned and joined with appellant Donald R. Meyers to form Burlingame Builders, Inc. (Burlingame), a direct competitor of Morlife in the commercial roof repair market. Morlife claimed appellants unfairly competed with it by misappropriating confidential customer information in violation of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA)  [*1518]  ( Civ. Code, § 3426 et seq.). 3 After a nonjury trial, the court found for Morlife, awarded it $ 39,293.47 [***2]  in monetary damages, and granted injunctive relief. Applying the appropriate standard of review to the evidence before the court, we uphold the trial court's finding that Burlingame used trade secrets to compete unfairly with Morlife. We further find the monetary and injunctive relief granted against Burlingame was warranted by the evidence. Therefore, we affirm.

FACTS

Morlife is in the business of inspecting, maintaining, and repairing roofs primarily for commercial properties. Before he terminated his employment with Morlife, Perry was its sales representative and had been with the company since its formation. During his employment, Perry signed an agreement not to use, duplicate, or disclose information about Morlife's customers in the event he terminated his employment. Bowersmith was employed by Morlife as its production manager. Perry and Bowersmith  [****1743]  were in key positions at Morlife, and they necessarily had an intimate knowledge [***3]  of the business and its customers.

In July 1993, appellants discussed the possibility of starting another roofing company. In October 1993, both Perry and Bowersmith resigned from Morlife. When Perry left Morlife's employ, he took his collection of customer business cards he had accumulated over his six years of employment. According to Perry's testimony at trial, the business cards represented approximately 75 to 80 percent of Morlife's customer base.

Burlingame began operations on November 1, 1993. Through letters, telephone calls, and personal visits, Perry contacted former Morlife customers seeking their business for his own newly formed company. In doing so, Perry used the customer business cards he took when he left Morlife. At the time of trial, Morlife identified 32 former customers who had switched their business to Burlingame.

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

56 Cal. App. 4th 1514 *; 66 Cal. Rptr. 2d 731 **; 1997 Cal. App. LEXIS 648 ***; 45 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1741 ****; 97 Cal. Daily Op. Service 6508; 13 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 291; 97 Daily Journal DAR 10589

MORLIFE, INC., Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LLOYD PERRY et al., Defendants and Appellants.

Prior History:  [***1]  Superior Court of Alameda County. Super. Ct. No. H-173857-1. Jennie Rhine, Judge. 1

, Trial judge.

Disposition: The judgment is affirmed.

CORE TERMS

customers, trade secret, solicitation, misappropriation, customer list, roofing, former employee, customer information, confidential, injunction, former employer, trial court, secret, enjoined, economic value, disclosure, injunctive relief, solicit business, do business, enrichment, contacted, repair, substantial evidence, business card, employees, telephone, damages, percent

Civil Procedure, Standards of Review, Substantial Evidence, General Overview, Labor & Employment Law, Conditions & Terms, Trade Secrets & Unfair Competition, Trade Secrets, Trade Secrets Law, Employee Duties & Obligations, Employee Knowledge & Skill, Right to Compete, Business & Corporate Compliance, Contracts Law, Types of Contracts, Covenants, Trade Secret Determination Factors, Business Use, Preliminary Considerations, Equity, Property Rights, Customers of Former Employer, Protected Information, Customer Lists, Economic Value, Misappropriation Actions, Elements of Misappropriation, Acquisition, Definitions of Misappropriation, Improper Means, Definition Under Uniform Act, Remedies, Injunctions, Preliminary & Temporary Injunctions, Duration, Disclosures, Damages, Compensatory Damages