Timothy J. Ryan and Farm Direct Supply, LLC v. Ayco Farms ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •          DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
    FOURTH DISTRICT
    TIMOTHY J. RYAN, individually, and FARM DIRECT SUPPLY, LLC, a
    Florida limited liability company,
    Petitioners,
    v.
    AYCO FARMS, INC., a Florida corporation,
    Respondent.
    Nos. 4D15-1520 and 4D15-1615
    [September 9, 2015]
    Consolidated petitions for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court for the
    Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Michael L. Gates, Judge;
    L.T. Case No. CACE 14-4916 12.
    Christopher N. Bellows, Marilyn Holifield, Pedro Gassant and Eric B.
    Hunt of Holland & Knight, LLP, Miami, for petitioners.
    Bambi G. Blum and Cassandre D. Anglade of Bambi G. Blum, P.A.,
    Miami, and Lance W. Shinder and Chelsea A. Embrey of Shinder Law
    Group, P.A., Boca Raton, for respondent.
    PER CURIAM.
    Petitioners, defendants below, seek certiorari review of two non-final
    orders compelling discovery in an action to enforce the non-compete
    provisions of an employment agreement.1 The lawsuit was filed after the
    individual defendant, Timothy Ryan, terminated his employment with the
    plaintiff and went to work for the corporate defendant, allegedly a
    competitor. The agreement provided that if Ryan were to violate the
    non-compete provisions, then the plaintiff would be entitled to an
    accounting and repayment of the benefits accruing as a result of the
    violation. The amended complaint has two counts, seeking (1) injunctive
    relief and (2) an accounting.
    1Petitioners filed a separate petition for writ of certiorari challenging each order.
    We granted their motion to consolidate both petitions for all purposes.
    Both challenged orders compel discovery pertaining to the plaintiff’s
    count for an accounting. The first order also compels defendants to
    produce customer lists, over their objection that the lists constitute a trade
    secret. Because the plaintiff has withdrawn its requests for the customer
    lists, this issue is moot.
    We grant relief as to the discovery pertaining to the count for an
    accounting. That discovery is premature. The right to an accounting has
    not yet been established, as the issue of whether the non-compete
    provisions have been violated by the defendants has not yet been litigated.
    Picerne Dev. Corp. of Fla. v. Tasca & Rotelli, 
    635 So. 2d 149
    , 150 (Fla. 4th
    DCA 1994); Collier Anesthesia, P.A. v. Worden, 
    726 So. 2d 342
    , 343 (Fla.
    2d DCA 1999); Drs. Weiland, Keiser, Jones, Shufflebarger, Cooper, P.A. v.
    Tindall, 
    372 So. 2d 505
    , 506 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).
    Petition granted in part.
    WARNER, GROSS and MAY, JJ., concur.
    *      *         *
    Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 4D15-1520 and 4D15-1615

Judges: Warner, Gross

Filed Date: 9/9/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024