Gemini Aluminum Corp. v. California Custom Shapes
California Court of Appeal
95 Cal. App. 4th 1249 (2002)

- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
Gemini Aluminum Corporation (Gemini) (plaintiff) and its subcontractor, California Custom Shapes, Inc. (CCS) (defendant), performed contract work for Gemini’s customer, Taskmaster Industries Corporation (Taskmaster). Unbeknownst to CCS, Taskmaster ran up unpaid bills from Gemini that totaled over $326,000. Gemini dropped Taskmaster as a customer in August 1995. Gemini accused CCS of misappropriating Gemini’s Taskmaster-related trade secrets to take over the Taskmaster account in January 1996. Soon, CCS also learned that Taskmaster could not pay its bills. In June 1996, CCS stopped supplying Taskmaster. Taskmaster declared bankruptcy in September 1996. Gemini waited until December 1996 to sue CCS for trade-secret misappropriation. After the jury found CCS innocent of misappropriation, the trial court held a hearing on CCS’s motion for an award of attorney’s fees to cover its defense costs. The court heard testimony that (1) prior to trial, Gemini’s lawyer spurned the request of CCS’s lawyer to provide a rationale for Gemini’s suit; (2) Gemini’s lawyer did not attempt to prove that Gemini’s Taskmaster-related information constituted trade secrets; and (3) Gemini’s management held deep animosity against CCS’s management. The court granted CCS’s motion and awarded attorney’s fees. Gemini appealed to the California Court of Appeal.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (McConnell, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.