123 So. 3d 1149
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2012Background
- Wyndham appeals a partial final summary judgment denying FDUTPA injunctive relief.
- Timeshares Direct used stolen Wyndham Owner Information via Fuentes and Mathews to solicit Wyndham owners.
- Owner Information is confidential and constitutes a valuable proprietary asset of Wyndham.
- Wyndham sought injunctive relief under FDUTPA (Count IV) along with other remedies.
- Trial court held no actual damages, precluding FDUTPA injunctive relief; appellate reversal on the injunctive-relief issue.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| FDUTPA injunctive relief without actual damages? | Wyndham argues FDUTPA allows injunctive relief regardless of actual damages. | Timeshares Direct argues injunctive relief requires actual damages. | Yes; injunctive relief may be available even without actual damages. |
| Owner Information as a trade secret and misappropriation? | Wyndham contends Owner Information is a trade secret and was misappropriated. | Timeshares Direct disputes the trade-secret status and misappropriation facts. | Court reverses on injunctive relief; remand for factual development on trade secret/misappropriation. |
| Misrepresentation of affiliation and consumer confusion supporting injunctive relief? | Misleading affiliation with Wyndham harms goodwill and is FDUTPA actionable. | Defendant contests the sufficiency of evidence for a likelihood of confusion. | FDUTPA injunctive relief potentially available where likelihood of confusion and unfair practices exist. |
| Jurisdiction to review non-final FDUTPA damages ruling? | Court declines review of damages portion; retains jurisdiction over non-final injunctive-relief ruling. |
Key Cases Cited
- The Florida Bar v. Greene, 926 So.2d 1195 (Fla. 2006) (de novo review; injunctive relief considerations under FDUTPA.)
- KC Leisure, Inc. v. Haber, 972 So.2d 1069 (Fla. 2008) (FDUTPA remedies include equitable relief; scope broader than damages.)
- Volusia County v. Aberdeen at Ormond Beach, L.P., 760 So.2d 126 (Fla. 2000) (summary-judgment standards and de novo review applicable to FDUTPA issues.)
- Macias v. HBC of Fla., Inc., 694 So.2d 88 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (FDUTPA rights and remedies; scope includes protections against unfair practices.)