Ferco Enterprises v. Taylor Recycling Facility, No. 07-15224 (11th Cir. 2008)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT AUG 29, 2008 THOMAS K. KAHN CLERK No. 07-15224 ________________________ D. C. Docket No. 05-02980-CV-ODE-1 FERCO ENTERPRISES, INC., Plaintiff-CounterDefendant-Appellant, versus TAYLOR RECYCLING FACILITY, LLC, JAMES W. TAYLOR, JR., MARK PAISLEY, TAYLOR BIOMASS ENERGY, LLC, TAYLOR HOLDING GROUP, LTD., Defendants-CounterClaimants-CounterDefendants-Appellees, JAW ENTERPRISES, INC., JOHN A. WILLIAMS, Counter-DefendantsCounter-ClaimantsAppellants. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia _________________________ (August 29, 2008) Before WILSON, PRYOR and COX, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Appellants FERCO Enterprises, Inc. ( FERCO ), JAW Enterprises, Inc. ( JAW ), and John A. Williams appeal the district court s entry of summary judgment in favor of Appellees Taylor Recycling Facility, LLC, James W. Taylor, Jr., Taylor Biomass Energy, LLC, Taylor Holding Group, Ltd., (collectively, Taylor Appellees ), and Mark Paisley. Appellants sued Taylor Appellees and Paisley for misappropriation of confidential information and trade secrets, and breach of confidentiality agreements. The Taylor Appellees then raised claims against FERCO, JAW, and Williams for breach of contract, quantum meruit, and tortious interference with contract. JAW then asserted additional claims against the Taylor Appellees and Paisley. All parties moved for summary judgment, and the district court granted each motion. On appeal, FERCO, JAW, and Williams argue the following: (1) genuine issues of material fact preclude summary judgment for Taylor Appellees and 2 Paisley on the trade secrets claims; (2) the district court erred in rejecting Appellants ratification argument; (3) genuine issues of material fact preclude summary judgment for Paisley on the breach of duty of loyalty and confidentiality agreement claims; (4) the district court erred in determining that Appellee James Taylor is not personally liable for claims against Taylor Recycling Facility and Taylor Biomass Energy; (5) the district court erred in entering summary judgment for Taylor Appellees on the tortious interference claim; (6) the district court erred in finding that the Georgia Trade Secrets Act of 1990, O.C.G.A. § 10-1-760 et seq, preempted the common law claims; and (7) the district court erred in entering summary judgment for Paisley on the computer crime claims. After reviewing the record and the parties briefs, and with the benefit of having heard oral argument, we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. AFFIRMED. 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.