Reilly Financial Advisors v. Cariani CA4/1

I. INTRODUCTION

Reilly Financial Advisors, LLP (RFA) sued two former employees, David Cariani and Matthew Griffith, and their new employer, Centura Wealth Advisory, (collectively, Respondents) for trade secret misappropriation, among other claims. After nearly two years of discovery, Respondents filed a motion for summary judgment. RFA sought an extension on its response but, rather than responding to the motion, RFA moved to dismiss its claims. Respondents sought, and the trial court awarded, attorney fees pursuant to Civil Code section 3426.4 of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA), which gives the trial court discretion to award such fees

if a claim of misappropriation is made in bad faith.1 RFA appeals from the judgment awarding fees and asserts that the trial court erred in determining that Respondents had met the two-prong test for establishing that RFA brought its misappropriation claim in bad faith. We disagree and affirm the judgment.

II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. Allegations in the Complaint RFA is a financial planning and investment firm. Cariani began working for RFA in April 2013, initially as a senior wealth advisor and later as chief…