 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Albouz v. Ismail9/20/2005
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
Ehab Ismail, D.D.S., Sandie Mesquit, and Maria Montez (collectively appellants) appeal the judgment entered after a jury found in favor of Maher Albouz, D.D.S., on his claims against Ismail and Mesquit for misappropriation of trade secrets and intentional interference with prospective economic relations, and on appellants' claims against Albouz for wrongful termination. Appellants contend the trial court abused its discretion in denying their motion for a new trial because the jury rendered inconsistent verdicts. We affirm.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Appellants are former employees of Family Dental Care (FDC), a dental practice owned by respondent Albouz. Ismail was employed by FDC as a dentist for a short period in 2001, and Montez worked there as a billing clerk from January to September of 2001. Mesquit was employed by FDC as a receptionist from March until November of 2000, when she resigned from her position. At her request, she was rehired in the same position a month later, but her employment was ultimately terminated in September of 2003. According to Albouz, all three were fired for insubordination and unprofessional behavior.
Shortly after Mesquit was fired, she and Ismail decided to contact several FDC patients and inform them that they had been overcharged for dental services or had been charged for upgrades they had not received. Information regarding patients' treatment and their contact information was obtained from confidential patient files that either Mesquit or Ismail had taken from FDC's office prior to their termination.
After Albouz discovered these actions, he filed a complaint against Ismail and Mesquit for defamation, intentional interference with economic advantage, and misappropriation of trade secrets. Ismail and Mesquit cross-complained against Albouz for wrongful termination in violation of public policy. Montez also filed a complaint for wrongful termination. Appellants alleged they had been terminated from their positions at FDC after they discovered that the company was engaging in fraudulent billing practices.
Trial was by jury. Albouz conceded at trial that some of the patients Ismail had contacted had been overcharged or charged for services they had not received. He contended, however, that the errors were inadvertent and were the result of shoddy work performance by FDC employees, such as Mesquit and Montez, who were responsible for billing. In support of this contention, Albouz presented evidence indicating that several other patients had been undercharged.
In defending against the misappropriation claim, Ismail denied using information from FDC's confidential files in contacting patients. Although he claimed he had found the patients' telephone numbers in the telephone book, one of the patients Ismail contacted testified that his telephone number was unlisted.
The jury found in favor of Albouz on his misappropriation and intentional interference claims against Ismail and Mesquit, and on all three of appellants' wrongful termination claims. On the slander claims, the jury found in favor of Ismail and Mesquit on the ground that neither had made any false statements to the patients they had contacted regarding their FDC billings. Ismail and Mesquit were ordered to pay damages totaling $29,700 and $14,800, respectively.
<
Page 1 2 3 California Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|