ALAN SCOTT, D.C., P.A., APPELLANT,
v.
GREGG F. MOSES, D.C., APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A chiropractor's professional association cannot enjoin a former employee chiropractor from using patient information obtained from files, as patient names and addresses do not constitute trade secrets under Florida law absent evidence they were kept secret and could not be obtained by other means.
Patient names and addresses obtained by an employee from an employer's files do not constitute trade secrets under Florida law absent evidence the information was kept secret and could not be obtained by other means.
[1] Patient names and addresses in a healthcare provider's files do not qualify as trade secrets under Florida law unless the employer demonstrates the information was kept s…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Knowledge acquired by an employee concerning names and addresses of customers is not the property of the employer unless such has been obtained in confidence”
Court cited Renpak, Inc. v. Oppenheimer to establish the legal standard for when customer information constitutes protectable employer property.
A chiropractor's professional association sought to enjoin its former employee, also a chiropractor, from using patient information obtained from the …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Customer Lists cases and more on FLexlaw
KLEIN, Judge.
Appellant, a chiropractor’s professional association, seeks to enjoin appellee, its former employee, and a chiropractor, from using information appellee gained from appellant’s patients’ files and soliciting appellant’s patients. Although they did not have a non-compete agreement, appellant argues that it is still entitled to relief because, the information regarding its patients constitutes “trade secrets” under section 688.002(4), Florida Statutes (1997). In Harry G. Blackstone, D.O., P.A. v. Dade City Osteopathic Clinic, 511 So. 2d 1050 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), the second district concluded, under similar facts, that the names of the patients of an osteopathic clinic were not trade secrets. The court relied on Renpak, Inc. v. Oppenheimer, 104 So. 2d 642, 645 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958)(“Knowledge acquired by an employee concerning names and addresses of customers is not the property of the employer unless such has been obtained in confidence”).
We disagree with appellant’s argument that this case is distinguishable from Blackstone because appellee obtained the information from appellant’s files. As the court pointed out in Blackstone, there was “no evidence that the names of the Clinic’s patients were a secret and could not be obtained by other means.” Id. at 1051.
We therefore affirm the denial of injunctive relief.
GUNTHER and FARMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Renpak, Inc. v. Oppenheimer, 104 So. 2d 642 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958)
- Harry G. Blackstone, D.O., P.A. v. Dade City Osteopathic Clinic, M. Oliva, D.O., P.A., 511 So. 2d 1050 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)