ARCHITECTRONICS, INC., a New York corporation, Plaintiff, -against- CONTROL SYSTEMS, INC., a Minnesota corporation, ARTIST GRAPHICS CORPORATION, a Minnesota corporation, CAD SOURCE, INC., a Delaware corporation, and ACCESS GRAPHICS, INC., a Delaware corporation, Defendants., 935 F. Supp. 425

Summary

Two competitors alleged that no duty of confidentiality arose on the contract with them because the agreement between those competitors and the copywriter did not provide for the disclosure of protected technology to those competitors. The court held, however, that the trade secret misappropriation claims against the competitors were viable. The court held, however, that a duty of confidentiality arose from a confidentiality agreement signed by a competitor's president at a trade show. The court construed the competitors' letter for clarification as a motion for reargument pursuant to U.S. Dist. Ct., S.D. N.Y., R. 3(j). The court held that its previous ruling did not preclude liability for trade secret misappropriation based on breach of a duty of confidentiality arising from a different contract. The court held that the copywriter's allegations of willful inducement of breach of contract and tortious interference with the copywriter's contractual relations was disposed of because ...