Wednesday, August 22, 2007, 8/22/2007 11:41:00 AM

Synergetics Announces That Former Employees' Post-Trial Motions Denied But That Its Own Pre-Trial Conduct Will Reduce Collectable Judgment

By Todd
Synergetics USA, Inc. announced on August 22, 2007 that the U.S. District Court has ruled on post-judgment motions filed by defendants Charles Hurst and Michael McGowan.

In December 2005, a judgment in favor of Synergetics was entered in federal court against Hurst and McGowan on all counts after a jury found that they had misappropriated Synergetics' trade secrets, breached confidentiality agreements, breached their fiduciary duties to Synergetics, and had intentionally interfered with Synergetics' business relationships. In February 2007, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment in all respects. However, prior to the appellate court decision, Hurst and McGowan filed in the District Court a motion to vacate the judgment and a motion seeking sanctions, asserting that Synergetics engaged in improper pre-trial conduct.

Today, the Court dismissed the defendants' motion to vacate the judgment, allowing Synergetics to retain its judgment against Hurst and McGowan. The Court also awarded Hurst and McGowan $1.17 million in sanctions, which the Company intends to offset against the original $2.35 million judgment in the Company's favor against Hurst and McGowan.

"Although we are pleased with the final outcome of this litigation for Synergetics' shareholders and employees, we are greatly disappointed in the Court's opinion that Synergetics did not conduct itself in pre-trial matters according to the highest legal standards. This was not our intent," said Gregg D. Scheller, President and Chief Executive Officer of Synergetics USA, Inc. "Synergetics is a medical technology company that relies heavily on its trade secrets for success in the marketplace. Synergetics has and will continue to vigorously defend these trade secrets from those who would misappropriate them. The Company will continue to diligently pursue its collection efforts in the judgment against Hurst and McGowan."

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

back to top