319 A.3d 909
Del.2024Background
- Smash Franchise Partners, LLC filed suit against Kevin McLaren and others, alleging eight claims including misappropriation of trade secrets under the Delaware Uniform Trade Secrets Act (DUTSA).
- Before trial, Smash dropped most claims—including the DUTSA claim—against McLaren, effectively leaving him out of the remaining claims.
- McLaren petitioned for attorney’s fees under various grounds, notably under DUTSA, after prevailing in court.
- The Court of Chancery’s July 2023 opinion and September 2023 judgment denied all parties attorney’s fees, ordering each to bear their own costs.
- McLaren appealed, arguing the court failed to adequately address his request for attorney’s fees and that it wrongly denied his motion for a protective order during discovery, awarding fees instead to Smash.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Failure to address McLaren’s request for attorney’s fees | Court did not address his DUTSA fee claim | Fees were explicitly/implicitly denied | No abuse of discretion; denial upheld |
| Denial of protective order in discovery and fee award to Smash | Protective order wrongly denied, fees wrong | Smash’s disclosures sufficient, fees justified | Court acted within its discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Sugarland Indus., Inc. v. Thomas, 420 A.2d 142 (Del. 1980) (standard for reviewing attorney’s fee awards)
- Coleman v. PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLC, 902 A.2d 1102 (Del. 2006) (standard for reviewing discovery rulings)
- SmithKline Beecham Pharms. Co. v. Merck & Co., 766 A.2d 442 (Del. 2000) (requirements for trade secret disclosures in discovery)