In the only non-compete case decided by a Tennessee appellate court so far in 2011, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court and held that Otter's was the prevailing party in a suit against its former C.O.O., Coppage, and was entitled to recover it's attorney's fees pursuant to the fee provision in the non-compete agreement. Although both parties made multiple claims against the other and requested an award of attorney's fees, Otter's was awarded a preliminary injunction and a temporary restraining order and was able to convince the trial court to order Coppage to return the confidential and trade secret information he apparently retained after his termination. Coppage, on the other hand, only won a small judgment against Otter's based on its breach of a Membership Interest Purchase Agreement. That agreement, unlike the non-compete, did not include a fee provision, so Coppage was unable to recover his fees.
The Court of Appeals also affirmed the trial court's decision to extend the temporary injunction through the end of the two year period during which Coppage was precluded from competing with Otter's. This is not surprising given the evidence that Coppage kept confidential and trade secret information, including Otter's operations manual, after he was terminated and may have been sending information to Otter's main competitor, McDougal's Chicken. Don't expect courts to give you the benefit of the doubt if you fail to return confidential and trade secret information after leaving an employer.
Otter's Chicken Tender, LLC v. Joey Coppage, 2011 Tenn. App. LEXIS 347 (Tenn. App. 2011).
Comments