WEC Carolina Energy Solutions LLC v. Miller
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
687 F.3d 199 (2012)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
Mike Miller (defendant) was a project director at WEC Carolina Energy Solutions LLC (WEC) (plaintiff), and Emily Kelley (defendant) was Miller’s assistant. WEC provided Miller and Kelley with company computers and phones and authorized them to access the company’s intranet and computer servers. Although WEC maintained employee policies that prohibited using information without authorization or downloading information to a personal computer, Miller and Kelley had unrestricted access to their work computers. Prior to resigning from WEC in April 2010, Miller and Kelley allegedly downloaded WEC’s confidential documents to a personal computer and emailed documents to Miller’s personal email address. Thereafter, Miller and Kelly began working for WEC’s competitor Arc Energy Services, Inc. (Arc). Miller used WEC’s information to make a sales pitch on behalf of Arc, which was awarded two customer projects. WEC sued Miller, Kelley, and Arc for violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). WEC claimed that Miller and Kelley, as agents of Arc, violated WEC’s computer-use policy and breached their fiduciary duties, thereby causing Miller and Kelley to lose or exceed authorization to access the computer information. The district court found that WEC had failed to state a cause of action under the CFAA. WEC appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Floyd, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 790,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 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.
