Robbins d/b/a Supermarket Specialty Products v. Supermarket Equip. Sales LLC

The trial court undermined the exclusivity of the Georgia Trade Secrets Act GTSA by providing the appellee the same relief based on the same conduct under O.C.G.A. § 9-5-1 after finding that the misappropriate property was not a trade secret under the GTSA.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Appellee Supermarket Equipment Sales, LLC SES is a company that, among other economic endeavors, makes and supplies outer components or “skins” for grocery store refrigeration units. SES was formed on October 13, 2009, when its immediate predecessor Supermarket Equipment Resale, Inc. SER was foreclosed upon by its bank. At the time of foreclosure, a deal was structured such that SES leased, with an option to buy, SER’s real estate from the foreclosing bank, and SES took out a loan from the foreclosing bank to buy SER’s assets. As part of the deal, the original owner of SER remained personally liable for the note between SES and the foreclosing bank. According to written corporate minutes dated October 13, 2009, the SER board of directors, as its final act, assigned its trade secrets and proprietary information to SES. These trade secrets and proprietary information allegedly included a library of drawings of refrigeration skins SER had accumulated in the course of eight years conducting its business.

Appellant Daniel Robbins worked for SER prior to its foreclosure. He left SER and began his own refrigeration skin business, appellant TCD Squared d/b/a Supermarket Specialty Products SSP, in or about February 2009. At SSP, Robbins would take orders, draw the skins to specification, have the skin pieces manufactured, and hire contractors for installation. Robbins paid Custom Metal to manufacture the metal pieces used for the skins based on SSP drawings. During the course of the litigation, Custom Metal produced 1,500 drawings it received from SSP. Appellant Robbins testified that he drew the 1,500 drawings. SES, however, alleges these 1,500 drawings are its proprietary information which it obtained when SER foreclosed.

Robbins d/b/a Supermarket Specialty Products v. Supermarket Equip. Sales LLC

The trial court undermined the exclusivity of the Georgia Trade Secrets Act GTSA by providing the appellee the same relief based on the same conduct under O.C.G.A. § 9-5-1 after finding that the misappropriate property was not a trade secret under the GTSA.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report