Timothy J. Ryan and Farm Direct Supply, LLC v. Ayco Farms

174 So. 3d 615, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 13507
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedSeptember 9, 2015
Docket4D15-1520 and 4D15-1615
StatusPublished

This text of 174 So. 3d 615 (Timothy J. Ryan and Farm Direct Supply, LLC v. Ayco Farms) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Timothy J. Ryan and Farm Direct Supply, LLC v. Ayco Farms, 174 So. 3d 615, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 13507 (Fla. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioners, defendants below, seek cer-tiorari review of two non-final orders compelling discovery in an action to enforce the non-compete provisions of an employment agreement. 1 The lawsuit was filed after the individual defendant, Timothy Ryan, terminated his employment with the plaintiff and went to work for the corporate defendant, allegedly a competitor. The agreement provided that if Ryan were to violate the non-compete provisions, then the plaintiff would be entitled to an accounting and repayment of the benefits accruing as a result of the violation. The amended complaint has two counts, seeking (1) injunctive relief and (2) an accounting. .

Both challenged orders compel discovery pertaining to the plaintiffs count for an accounting. The first order also compels defendants to produce customer lists, over their objection that the lists constitute a trade secret. Because the plaintiff has withdrawn its requests for the customer lists, this issue is moot.

We grant relief as to the discovery pertaining to the count for an accounting. *616 That discovery is premature. The right to ■an accounting has not yet been established, as the issue of whether the non-compete provisions have been violated by the defendants has not yet been litigated. Picerne Dev. Corp. of Fla. v. Tasca & Rotelli, 635 So.2d 149, 150 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Collier Anesthesia, P.A. v. Worden, 726 So.2d 342, 343 (Fla. 2d DCA. 1999); Drs. Weiland, Reiser, Jones, Shufflebarger, Cooper, P.A. v. Tindall, 372 So.2d 505, 506 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979):

Petition granted in part.

WARNER, GROSS and MAY, JJ., concur.
1

. Petitioners filed a separate petition for writ of certiorari challenging each order. We granted their motion to consolidate both petitions for all purposes.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Picerne Dev. Corp. v. Tasca & Rotelli
635 So. 2d 149 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
Collier Anesthesia, PA v. Worden
726 So. 2d 342 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)
Drs. Weiland, Keiser, Jones, Shufflebarger, Cooper, P. A. v. Tindall
372 So. 2d 505 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1979)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
174 So. 3d 615, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 13507, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/timothy-j-ryan-and-farm-direct-supply-llc-v-ayco-farms-fladistctapp-2015.