Joshua David Mellberg LLC v. Fernando Godinez
22-15668
| 9th Cir. | Feb 11, 2025Background
- Joshua David Mellberg LLC (JDM) and its president sued former employees, Fernando Godinez and Carly Uretz, alleging misappropriation of trade secrets and confidential information, among other claims.
- JDM's claims relied on the existence and breach of written employment policies intended to protect its confidential information.
- The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Defendants on all claims, finding JDM failed to establish damages.
- Following the judgment, the district court awarded attorneys’ fees to Defendants under Arizona Revised Statutes section 12-341.01(A), applicable to actions arising out of a contract.
- JDM appealed the award of attorney’s fees and requested the court certify a question to the Arizona Supreme Court, which was denied.
- The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment and fee award.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether fee award to Uretz was proper | Claims against Uretz did not arise out of a contract | Claims arose from breach of employment contract policies | Fee award proper; claims arose out of a contract |
| Application of Warner factors for fees | Court misapplied factors in awarding discretionary fees | Court applied Warner factors correctly; prevailed at summary judgment | No abuse of discretion; fee award affirmed |
| Necessity of Defendants’ legal efforts | Attorneys’ efforts were superfluous due to overlap with Impact | Separate legal issues required distinct efforts by Defendants’ counsel | Defendants’ attorneys' work justified; fee award stands |
| Request to certify question to AZ Supreme Court | Question should be certified due to unsettled law | Certification unnecessary | Certification request denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Ford v. Revlon, 734 P.2d 580 (Ariz. 1987) (explains claims arising out of contract when essential to alleged misconduct)
- Associated Indem. Corp. v. Warner, 694 P.2d 1181 (Ariz. 1985) (sets out factors for awarding attorney’s fees in contract claims)
- Med. Protective Co. v. Pang, 740 F.3d 1279 (9th Cir. 2013) (provides standard of review for district court exercise of discretion in fee awards)