From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

KCH Services, Inc. v. Vanaire, Inc.

United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky, Louisville Division
Jul 9, 2009
CIVIL ACTION NO. 05-777-C (W.D. Ky. Jul. 9, 2009)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 05-777-C.

July 9, 2009


MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER


This matter is before the court upon the defendant Guillermo Vanegas Sr.'s motion for summary judgment (R. 187). The court will deny the motion because, contrary to this defendant's claim, a dispute exists as to the extent of Vanegas Sr.'s control over Vanaire, Inc. and his potential liability.

In response to the defendant Vanegas Sr.'s motion, the plaintiff highlights dozens of statements from deponents revealing diverse aspects of Vanegas Sr.'s exercise of authority within Vanaire, Inc. The plaintiff has come forward with more than a scintilla of evidence, and enough on which a jury could reasonably find in its favor on the issue. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(e); Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 252 (1986); Street v. J.C. Bradford Co., 886 F.2d 1472, 1479 (6th Cir. 1989). The inference drawn from the defendant Vanegas Sr.'s activity with the defendant Vanaire, viewed in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, is that it was so extensive as to render Vanegas Sr. partially responsible for the tortious activity alleged. See Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 588 (1986) (quoting U.S. v. Diebold, Inc., 369 U.S. 654, 655 (1962)). The genuine issues as to material facts that exist concerning Vanegas Sr.'s liability under Kentucky common and statutory law include but are not limited to 1) his control over the company; 2) his involvement in recruiting, hiring, and setting terms for employees who had worked for the plaintiff; and 3) his knowledge of appropriation of any trade secrets by Vanaire from the plaintiff. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986). Accordingly,

See generally White v. Winchester Land Development Corp., 584 S.W. 2d 56, 61 (Ky.Ct.App. 1979) (discussing theories of shareholder liability); Peters v. Frey, 429 S.W.2d 847, 849 (Ky. 1968) (stating that an agent of a corporation is personally liable for a tort committed by him although he was acting for the corporation) (citing Murray v. Cowherd, 147 S.W. 6 (Ky. 1912)).

IT IS ORDERED that the defendant Guillermo Vanegas Sr.'s motion for summary judgment (R. 187) is DENIED.


Summaries of

KCH Services, Inc. v. Vanaire, Inc.

United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky, Louisville Division
Jul 9, 2009
CIVIL ACTION NO. 05-777-C (W.D. Ky. Jul. 9, 2009)
Case details for

KCH Services, Inc. v. Vanaire, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:KCH SERVICES, INC., PLAINTIFF, v. VANAIRE, INC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky, Louisville Division

Date published: Jul 9, 2009

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 05-777-C (W.D. Ky. Jul. 9, 2009)