Cuidado Casero Home Health of El Paso, Inc. v. Ayuda Home Health Care Services, LLC, 404 S.W.3d 737

Appellant Cuidado Casero Home Health sued former employees who formed Ayuda Home Health and discharged about thirty patients, alleging misappropriation of trade secrets, breach of fiduciary duty, tortious interference, conversion, and disgorgement.
The former employees—Ayuda Home Health, Edwing A. Martinez, Lizette Martinez, Jesus R. Rodriguez, and Olga L. Rodriguez—had access to confidential information and later formed Ayuda while still employed.
The trial court granted summary judgments on all motions without specifying grounds; the counterclaims were nonsuited; this appeal followed.
Appellees moved on no-evidence and traditional grounds; the court ultimately affirmed some judgments and reversed/remanded others.
Damages for misappropriation of trade secrets were the focal point for the no-evidence motions, with the court requiring evidentiary support beyond mere assertions.
The court discussed the statute of frauds and fiduciary duties, and analyzed whether Rodriguez had a valid non-compete/confidentiality agreement and whether there were genuine issues on breach of contract and fiduciary-duty claims.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Misappropriation damages sufficiency	Appellant contends damages evidence supports misappropriation claim.	Rodriguez challenged damages as lacking proof; other appellees challenged damages as well.	Damages evidence insufficient; Olga L. Rodriguez granted no-evidence dismissal on damages; other apellees likewise lack sufficient damages proof on this claim.
Conversion	Rodriguez used confidential information for personal gain.	Rodriguez did not take tangible property or misappropriate property; evidence insufficient.	No evidence of dominion/control over Appellant’s property; trial court properly granted summary judgment for Rodriguez on conversion.
Breach of contract	Existence of confidentiality/non-compete agreement; Rodriguez breached.	No valid written agreement established; statute of frauds and conflicting evidence; questions remain.	Issue sustained as to Olga L. Rodriguez; genuine issues on whether a valid written agreement existed; summary judgment improper on breach of contract.
Breach of fiduciary duty	Rodriguez breached fiduciary duty by misappropriating trade secrets and soliciting patients.	Actions were within duties or unsupported by evidence of breach.	Summary judgment improper for Rodriguez; evidence raised material fact question on fiduciary breach.

Rusty’s Weigh Scales & Serv., Inc. v. North Tex. Scales, Inc., 314 S.W.3d 105 (Tex.App.-El Paso 2010) (damages for lost profits must be reasonably certain and supported by objective data)
King Ranch, Inc. v. Chapman, 118 S.W.3d 742 (Tex. 2003) (more than a scintilla of evidence required to create fact issue; reasonable minds may differ)
Prize Energy Resources, L.P. v. Cliff Hoskins, Inc., 345 S.W.3d 537 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 2011) (burden to provide a complete record for appellate review; no single-party motion context)
Carr v. Brasher, 776 S.W.2d 567 (Tex.1989) (standard for reviewing no-evidence and traditional summary judgments)
Frost Nat. Bank v. Fernandez, 315 S.W.3d 494 (Tex.2009) (affirmative defense proving entitlement to summary judgment must be conclusive on all elements)
Diversicare Gen. Partner., Inc. v. Rubio, 185 S.W.3d 842 (Tex.2005) (Rule 166a(c) burden shifting in traditional summary judgments)
City of Houston v. Clear Creek Basin Auth., 589 S.W.2d 671 (Tex.1979) (standard for summary judgment burden shifting)
Aguilar v. Morales, 162 S.W.3d 825 (Tex.App.-El Paso 2005) (requirements of genuine issue of material fact and evidentiary burden in no-evidence motions)
Goeth v. Craig, Terrill & Hale, L.L.P., 2005 WL 850349 (Tex.App.-Austin 2005) (disgorgement remedy tied to breach of fiduciary duty; not available absent breach)