Defendant, Bartell, worked part-time for approximately seven years as an independent contractor for a manufacturer of automobile and truck transmission testing equipment ("plaintiff"). He never signed a restrictive covenant or a confidentiality agreement. When Bartell left to begin a competing business, plaintiff filed suit under Wisconsin's Uniform Trade Secrets Act. The lower court granted summary judgment for Bartell, and plaintiff appealed.
The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals decided that as an independent contractor, Bartell presumptively owned his work product, and plaintiff failed to offer into evidence any proof that the knowledge Bartell gained during his years working at the company belonged to plaintiff. However, with respect to any information developed by plaintiff, the issue becomes whether Bartell, as the recipient of the information, knew or should have known that it is a trade secret and that the disclosure by plaintiff to him was made in confidence. Hence, Bartell did not acquire rights to plaintiff's trade secrets just because he used the information it supplied to him in the performance of his duties. The Court of Appeals discerned that a reasonable jury could find that Bartell knew plaintiff treated at least some of this data as its trade secrets. Furthermore, there was still a question as to whether Bartell disclosed or used plaintiff's confidential information improperly. The Seventh Circuit, therefore, vacated the judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.
Hicklin Engineering, L.C. v. Bartell, 2006 WL 399165 (7th Cir., February 22, 2006).
Comments