Fanelli v. BMC Software, Inc.

Full title: BART FANELLI, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. BMC SOFTWARE, INC., a Delaware…

Court: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Apr 20, 2017

No. 15-14431 (11th Cir. Apr. 20, 2017)

Opinion

No. 15-14431 No. 16-12339

04-20-2017

BART FANELLI, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. BMC SOFTWARE, INC., a Delaware corporation, Defendant-Appellant.

PER CURIAM

[DO NOT PUBLISH] D.C. Docket No. 1:11-cv-00436-LMM Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia Before WILSON, and JULIE CARNES Circuit Judges, and TREADWELL,^* District Judge PER CURIAM:

* Honorable Marc T. Treadwell, United States District Judge, for the Middle District of Georgia, sitting by designation. --------

We have considered all of BMC's specifications of error. We have reviewed the following under an abuse of discretion standard:

1. Whether the district court erred in allowing the jury to find that BMC owed a duty to Fanelli?

2. Whether the district court erred in allowing the jury to find that BMC was the proximate cause of harm to Fanelli?

3. Whether the district court erred by not setting aside the award for damages to reputation?

4. Whether the district court erred by excluding evidence as to Fanelli's post-BMC earnings?

5. Whether the district court erred in declining to overrule the jury's finding that BMC acted in bad faith under O.C.G.A. § 13-6-11?

6. Whether the district court erred in granting Fanelli's motion for attorney's fees and costs pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-11-68?

We have reviewed de novo the following specification of error:

7. Whether the district court erred in denying BMC's Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law on Fanelli's claim for fraudulent nondisclosure?

After careful review of the briefs and the record, and having the benefit of oral argument, we find no reversible error. The decision of the district court is

AFFIRMED.