Kansas Supreme Court - 99536 â Wolfe Electric, Inc. v. Duckworth
Kansas Supreme Court - 99536 â Wolfe Electric, Inc. v. Duckworth
Kansas Supreme Court - 99536 â Wolfe Electric, Inc. v. Duckworth
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>Duckworth</strong> counterclaimed against <strong>Wolfe</strong> <strong>Electric</strong> for breach of contract for firing<br />
him without cause.<br />
Greatly summarized, during the 3-week jury trial <strong>Wolfe</strong> <strong>Electric</strong> alleged that<br />
<strong>Duckworth</strong> and Global had misappropriated eight pieces of information from <strong>Wolfe</strong><br />
<strong>Electric</strong>: (1) vendor list; (2) customer list; (3) CAD (computer-aided design) drawings; (4)<br />
the oven's Dymondwood handle; (5) electrical components; (6) lifting plates; (7) oven<br />
layout; and (8) bill of materials.<br />
Ron <strong>Wolfe</strong> testified <strong>Duckworth</strong> had been issued a laptop computer for use as the<br />
company's president and had unlimited access to <strong>Wolfe</strong> <strong>Electric</strong>'s CAD drawings. He<br />
believed <strong>Duckworth</strong> downloaded confidential <strong>Wolfe</strong> <strong>Electric</strong> files to an external hard drive<br />
the night before <strong>Duckworth</strong> left the company and deleted all of <strong>Wolfe</strong> <strong>Electric</strong>'s files and<br />
e-mails from the laptop before turning it over to <strong>Duckworth</strong>'s attorney. <strong>Wolfe</strong> claimed this<br />
information was inappropriately used in the development of the Global oven. By contrast,<br />
defendants generally contended they engaged in a legitimate reverse engineering of the<br />
<strong>Wolfe</strong> <strong>Electric</strong> oven to make their own.<br />
The trial court denied dispositive motions by defendants at the close of <strong>Wolfe</strong><br />
<strong>Electric</strong>'s case and their own. The jury then rejected <strong>Duckworth</strong>'s counterclaim against<br />
<strong>Wolfe</strong> <strong>Electric</strong> for breach of contract but held <strong>Duckworth</strong> and Global liable on each of<br />
<strong>Wolfe</strong> <strong>Electric</strong>'s claims. The jury awarded damages as follows:<br />
<strong>Duckworth</strong>—Breach of contract<br />
Loss of profits from sales $50,000<br />
Loss of opportunity for sales $125,000<br />
Loss of trade secrets and confidential business information $50,000<br />
Loss of good will $50,000<br />
9
Change language