LabMD, Inc. appeals an order by the Superior Court of Fulton County granting attorney fees to Adnan Tabrez Savera, M.D., pursuant to OCGA § 9-15-14. LabMD does not contend that the trial court’s award was not authorized by the evidence; rather, it claims simply that the amount of the trial court’s award should be reduced because it failed to apply a setoff and included sums that were not attributable to LabMD’s sanctionable conduct. Finding that the trial court failed to consider certain factors which could influence the amount of its award, we affirm in part, vacate the trial court’s order, and remand for further proceedings.
Relevant to the issues in this appeal, the trial court found that LabMD hired Dr. Savera in 2006 as its medical director and chief genitourinary pathologist. On January 22, 2010, Dr. Savera tendered 90 days’ notice of his resignation from LabMD as required by his employment contract. After Dr. Savera provided his notice, he continued working for LabMD but was terminated by LabMD on April 12, 2010—ten days shy of the conclusion of his 90-day notice term. On the same date, LabMD filed a complaint against Dr. Savera alleging that Dr. Savera breached certain restrictive covenants in his employment contract.1 In five subsequent amended complaints, LabMD asserted additional causes of action against Dr. Savera, including: i breach of contract for failure to maintain regular working hours; ii breach of fiduciary duty; iii misappropriation of trade secrets; iv violation of the Federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act 18 USC § 1030; v violation of the Georgia Computer Systems Protection Act OCGA § 16-9-93; vi trespass; and vii punitive damages. Of the eight claims asserted against Dr. Savera, two were abandoned by LabMD breach of contract restrictive covenants and breach of contract working hours, four were dismissed by the trial court on summary judgment misappropriation of trade secrets, federal computer crimes, trespass, and, with one exception, breach of fiduciary duty, and one was dismissed by the trial court on Dr. Savera’s motion for directed verdict during trial punitive damages. A jury returned verdicts in favor of Dr. Savera on LabMD’s remaining claims.
