Computer Task Group, Inc. v. Professional Support, Inc.
| Decision Date | 14 May 1982 |
| Citation | 88 A.D.2d 768,451 N.Y.S.2d 502 |
| Parties | COMPUTER TASK GROUP, INCORPORATED, Respondent, v. PROFESSIONAL SUPPORT, INCORPORATED, Paul H. Eastmer, Ronald E. Peters, Michael R. MacArthur, William D. Muhleck, William I. Murphy, Appellants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Blair & Roach by David Roach, Buffalo, for appellants.
Hodgson, Russ, Andrews, Woods & Goodyear by H. Kenneth Schroeder, Buffalo, for respondent.
Before SIMONS, J. P., and HANCOCK, CALLAHAN, DENMAN and MOULE, JJ.
This action instituted by Computer Task Group (CTG) seeks money damages and an injunction to prevent named defendants from offering or providing services to CTG customers. The complaint alleges that defendants conspired unfairly to compete with CTG, by using confidential information obtained during their association with CTG to induce customers to breach their service agreement and utilize defendant Professional Support, Inc. (PSI) for their programming needs. In asserting causes of action in tortious interference with contract, conspiracy to compete unfairly, breach of fiduciary obligation and others, CTG relies primarily on provisions in its customer services agreement wherein each respectively agrees not to solicit, hire, contract with or engage the employment or services of any employee for a period of 180 days.
The issue properly resolved by Special Term is not whether CTG has made a factual showing equivalent to a prima facie case as defendants contend, but whether the pleadings adequately identify the transaction and indicate the theory of recovery with sufficient precision to enable the court to control the case and the opponent to prepare (219 Broadway v. Alexander's, Inc., 46 N.Y.2d 506, 414 N.Y.S.2d 889, 387 N.E.2d 1205; Foley v. D'Agostino, 21 A.D.2d 60, 63, 248 N.Y.S.2d 121). Upon a motion to dismiss, the complaint is deemed to allege whatever may be implied from it, assuming the truth of the factual allegations (Morone v. Morone, 50 N.Y.2d 481, 429 N.Y.S.2d 592, 413 N.E.2d 1154; Terry v. Orleans County, 72 A.D.2d 925, 422 N.Y.S.2d 826; Lupinski v. Ilion, 59 A.D.2d 1050, 399 N.Y.S.2d 956).
There is an implicit duty upon an employee not to use confidential knowledge acquired in his employment in competition with his principal, even after the employment is terminated (Byrne v. Barrett, 268 N.Y. 199, 197 N.E. 217). The record contains affidavits which state that certain defendants, who were former officers of CTG,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
First Mfg. Co. v. Young
...967, 936 N.Y.S.2d 224 [2d Dept 2011] ; 30 FPS Prod., Inc. v. Livolsi, 68 AD3d 1101, supra; Computer Task Group, Inc. v. Professional Support, Inc., 88 A.D.2d 768, 451 N.Y.S.2d 502 [4th Dept 1982] ).Once the employment is terminated, the relationship between a former employee and employer is......
-
Wilson v. Bristol-Myers Co., BRISTOL-MYERS
...as an employee of defendants (Byrne v. Barrett, 268 N.Y. 199, 206, 197 N.E. 217 (1935); and Computer Task Group, Inc. v. Professional Support, Inc., 88 A.D.2d 768, 769, 451 N.Y.S.2d 502 (1982)). As quoted supra, when Mr. Wilson disclosed the concept in 1967 to the defendants, there was no d......
-
Nassau Soda Fountain Equipment Corp. v. Mason
...business (see, e.g., Refrigeration Alarm Systems Corp. v. Olsen, 87 A.D.2d 648, 449 N.Y.S.2d 6; Computer Task Group v. Professional Support, 88 A.D.2d 768, 769, 451 N.Y.S.2d 502; Byrne v. Barrett, 268 N.Y. 199, 206, 197 N.E. 217, rearg. denied 268 N.Y. 630, 198 N.E. 528). We further find th......
-
Comcast Sound Communications, Inc. v. Hoeltke
...(see, Reed, Roberts Assocs. v. Strauman, supra, 40 N.Y.2d at 308-309, 386 N.Y.S.2d 677, 353 N.E.2d 590; Computer Task Group v. Professional Support, 88 A.D.2d 768, 769, 451 N.Y.S.2d 502). Accordingly, defendants are entitled to summary judgment dismissing the Order insofar as appealed from ......