American Bldgs. Co. v. Pascoe Bldg. Systems, Inc.
| Decision Date | 05 July 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. S90A0103,S90A0103 |
| Citation | 260 Ga. 346,392 S.E.2d 860 |
| Parties | AMERICAN BUILDINGS COMPANY et al. v. PASCOE BUILDING SYSTEMS, INC. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Robert B. Hill, McLain & Merritt, P.C., Atlanta, for American Bldgs. Co. et al.
William G. Scrantom, Jr., Mark R. Youmans, Columbus, for Pascoe Bldg. Systems, Inc.
Pascoe Building Systems, Inc. sued American Buildings Company, Jack Pope and Jimmy Mehaffey. Pope and Mehaffey are former Pascoe employees who have become American employees. Pascoe seeks injunctive relief and damages based upon allegations that defendants, acting individually and in concert, have engaged in tortious interference with Pascoe's at-will employee relations, and that they have, or will, misappropriate Pascoe's trade secrets. This appeal is from the trial court's grant of interlocutory injunctive relief with respect to both of the foregoing claims. We reverse that part of the judgment relating to tortious interference with employee relations, and we affirm that part of the judgment relating to misappropriation of trade secrets.
Pascoe is engaged in the manufacture and sale of pre-engineered metal buildings. Its corporate office and principal place of business are located in Columbus, Georgia. American, a competitor of Pascoe, has its principal place of business in Eufaula, Alabama. Until shortly before this action, Pascoe employed Pope as corporate vice president working in its research department and Mehaffey as manager of its drafting department.
Pascoe has undergone various corporate reorganizations since 1979 and has experienced employee dissatisfaction. Pope became dissatisfied and made a decision to leave the company in the fall of 1988. He approached American the following December. American informed him it needed additional engineering personnel, and that the opening of a satellite engineering office in the Columbus/Phenix City area was possible. The area was desirable because of its proximity to Eufaula and because there are engineering and drafting personnel in this geographical area, including present and former Pascoe employees.
Pope accepted employment with American and began work in February of 1989. Prior to his leaving Pascoe, Pope, in response to inquiries from Pascoe employees, informed them that he was going to work for American and that there was a possibility that American would be opening an office in Phenix City. He testified that some Pascoe employees approached him and told him that they were dissatisfied with their jobs at Pascoe and were looking for new jobs, but did not want to leave the Columbus area.
American authorized Pope to open the engineering office and to hire an engineering squad. It instructed Pope not to offer any Pascoe employees larger salaries than they were making at Pascoe because Pascoe salaries in Columbus were "slightly more" than American salaries in Eufaula and because American could not afford to pay Pascoe employees any more than they were making at Pascoe. In March of 1989, American placed an advertisement in a Columbus newspaper stating that positions for design engineers and drafting technicians were available at American's Phenix City office, and that personnel with qualifying educational credentials and/or work experience were needed.
Seventeen Pascoe employees, including Mehaffey, submitted resumes to American. Shortly after accepting employment with American, but prior to leaving Pascoe, Mehaffey held individual conferences with drafting personnel under his supervision for the purpose of announcing annual pay raises. He made statements to the effect that Pascoe "wouldn't be around in the fall," "he didn't see how the company ... could last six months to a year," and "he didn't think that Pascoe was going to make it."
After interviewing prospective employees, Pope offered jobs to nine Pascoe employees, and seven accepted. These included MeHaffey, four draftsmen, one computer-aided-design operator, and one design engineer. These parties stated in affidavits that they left Pascoe's employ because they were insecure in their job positions and felt dissatisfied there. They further stated that Pope did not make any disparaging or false statements concerning Pascoe.
A Pascoe employee, whom Pope interviewed, but did not offer a job, gave testimony to the effect that Pope told him that he was hiring Mehaffey instead of the applicant because Mehaffey "could pull more people his way than I could my way." This witness further testified that, in the context of the conversation, he interpreted that as meaning that Mehaffey was a better leader than he and not that Mehaffey could more effectively hurt or damage Pascoe.
Pascoe complains that defendants, acting separately and in concert, wrongfully solicited and induced Pope, Mehaffey, and a number of other key employees to leave its employment. Pascoe alleges that the loss of these key employees essential to its business operations has caused it irreparable damage and that defendants' activities constitute tortious interference with employee relations and an unlawful restraint of trade and fair competition.
Pascoe also contends that certain proprietary information is within the knowledge of its former employees, who will make this information available to American. Although certain aspects of this information are within the public domain, Pascoe claims that the totality of the information--concerning the physical features of the products, the configuration of their component parts, and the manufacturing process developed by Pascoe--is unique in its combination, is not available to the general public, and has been treated by Pascoe as a valuable corporate asset and as confidential.
On the day Pascoe filed this complaint the trial court entered an ex parte temporary restraining order enjoining the defendants from (1) soliciting or inducing any current employee of Pascoe to become an employee of American; (2) granting such employment to a current employee of Pascoe; and (3) consummating an employment agreement with any persons who were employees of Pascoe within seven days prior to the date the order was entered.
The trial court subsequently granted Pascoe's request for an interlocutory injunction enjoining defendants from "soliciting, inducing, or recruiting any employees of [Pascoe] for employment with [American] pursuant to any plan or design of hiring that is targeted or directed at [Pascoe] and its employees as a source of employment." Defendants were further enjoined from "utilizing the knowledge" of the Pascoe employees with regard to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. Capital Funding VI, Ltd v. Patterson Bankshares, Inc.
...Inc. v. ERC P'ship , 228 Ga.App. 739, 492 S.E.2d 526, 529 (1997) (alterations in original) (quoting Am. Bldgs. Co. v. Pascoe Bldg. Sys. , 260 Ga. 346, 392 S.E.2d 860 (1990) ). However, this list of improper actions is not exhaustive, as Georgia courts have found other types of conduct suffi......
-
BB&T Ins. Servs., Inc. v. Renno
...Tribeca Homes, LLC v. Marathon Inv. Corp. , 322 Ga. App. 596, 598 (2), 745 S.E.2d 806 (2013).40 Am. Bldgs. Co. v. Pascoe Bldg. Sys., Inc. , 260 Ga. 346, 349 (2), 392 S.E.2d 860 (1990) ; accord Kirkland v. Tamplin , 285 Ga. App. 241, 244 (1) (b), 645 S.E.2d 653 (2007) ; Batayias v. Kerr-Mcge......
-
Cheramie Services, Inc. v. Shell Deepwater Production, Inc., No. 09-C-1633 (La. 4/23/2010)
...competitor had an unlawful or improper purpose or used unlawful or improper means. Id.; American Buildings Company v. Pascoe Building Systems, Inc., 260 Ga. 346, 348-349, 392 S.E. 2d 860, 863 (1990); Hechler Chevrolet, Inc. v. General Motors Corp., 230 Va. 396, 403, 337 S.E.2d 744, 748 (198......
-
Cheramie Serv. Inc v. Shell Deepwater Prod. Inc
...competitor had an unlawful or improper purpose or used unlawful or improper means. Id.; American Buildings Company v. Pascoe Building Systems, Inc., 260 Ga. 346, 348-349, 392 S.E.2d 860, 863 (1990); Hechler Chevrolet, Inc. v. General Motors Corp., 230 Va. 396, 403, 337 S.E.2d 744, 748 (1985......
-
Labor and Employment - W. Melvin Haas, Iii, William M. Clifton, Iii, and W. Jonathan Martin, Ii
...578 S.E.2d at 275. 133. Automated Solutions, 255 Ga. App. at 889, 567 S.E.2d at 339 (quoting Am. Bldgs. Co. v. Pascoe Bldg. Sys., Inc., 260 Ga. 346, 349, 392 S.E.2d 860, 863 (1990) (internal citations omitted)). 134. Id. 135. Id. 136. Id. 137. Id. at 889-90, 567 S.E.2d at 339. 138. 257 Ga. ......
-
Protecting Trade Secrets and Confidential Information in Georgia - C. Geoffrey Weirich and Daniel P. Hart
...vendors that apparently was sent to the president of the competitor by the former employee); Am. Bldgs. Co. v. Pascoe Bldg. Sys., Inc., 260 Ga. 346, 348-49, 392 S.E.2d 860, 863-64 (1990) (affirming grant of a TRO and an interlocutory injunction prohibiting a competitor from hiring the plain......
-
Application of Antitrust Principles to Business Tort Claims
...F. Supp. 2d 1217, 1237-38 (D. Kan. 2003). 17. See Energex Enters., 250 F. Supp. 2d at 1285-86; American Bldgs. Co., v. Pascoe Bldg. Sys., 392 S.E.2d 860, 863 (Ga. 1990); Guard-Life Corp. v. S. Parker Hardware Mfg. Corp., 406 N.E.2d 445, 449 (N.Y. 1980). 18. See Reazin, 663 F. Supp. at 1492.......
-
Business Associations - Paul A. Quiros, Lynn S. Scott, and William S. Smoak Jr.
...560-61, 595 S.E.2d 82, 84-85 (2004)). 88. Id. at 58-59, 670 S.E.2d at 877-78. 89. See, e.g., Am. Bldgs. Co. v. Pascoe Bldg. Sys., Inc., 260 Ga. 346, 349, 392 S.E.2d860, 864 (1990) (applying the fiduciary duty of loyalty to corporate officers); Gresham, 265 Ga. App. at 560, 595 S.E.2d at 84 ......