Cora-Leigh O’Neal
BUS 3350
8:00 A.M.

Case Brief 1: Raymond James

1. Case Name, Citation, and Court
Raymond James v. Leonard & Company
411 F. Supp. 2d 689 (2006)
United States Court of Appeals

2. Summary of Key Facts
A. A former employee of Raymond James & Associates, Ronald Boerjan, resigned from RJA on December 23, 2005, and began to work for RJA’s competitor, Leonard & Company. Boerjan began to solicit his former clients of RJA, to try to transfer to LC.

B. Noting that Boerjan has on record signed acknowledgements that he was aware and agreed to the policies and procedures prior to his hire at RJA, which included policies on what does and does not make up a “trade secret”, RJA seeks a preliminary injunction which prohibits Boerjan and LC from contacting, soliciting, or using any of RJA’s trade secrets, including by not limited to, customer lists and account numbers. 3. The Issue
Do customer lists meet the definition of trade secret, and if so, is Boerjan breeching that with his solicitation of his former clients? 4. Holding
No
5. Summary of Court’s Reasoning A. The likelihood of Boerjan’s success in transferring former client’s accounts to his new firm isn’t strong or substancial enough to be sufficicent enough to grant an injunction B. Customer lists developed by Boerjan are not protectable trade secrets. C. There is nothing wrong with an employee establishing and communicating with customers for whom he has formally done work with in previous