Opinion ID: 6326325
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: sufficiency of the evidence

Text: “Pursuant to Code § 8.01-680, the standard of review for determining the sufficiency of evidence on appeal is well established.” Nolte v. MT Tech. Enters., LLC, 284 Va. 80, 90 (2012) (alterations and citation omitted). “The reviewing court must examine the evidence in the light most favorable to . . . the prevailing party at trial, and the trial court’s judgment will not be disturbed unless it is plainly wrong or without evidence to support it.” Id. “When the law says that it is for the jury to judge of the credibility of a witness, it is not a matter of degree.” Simpson v. Commonwealth, 199 Va. 549, 557 (1957) (citation omitted). After an eight-day trial, the jury found in favor of World Telecom on three of the counts it had alleged against Sidya: misappropriation of trade secrets, tortious interference with a business expectancy, and civil conspiracy. Sidya argues that the jury verdict on all three counts must be set aside because it is plainly wrong or without evidence to support it. We disagree. 2 Evidence at trial demonstrated that in November 2010, Sidya and Mohammad Barmawi decided to start their own telephony business called SBC FZ, LLC (“SBC”). Barmawi was at the time CEO of World Telecom, and Sidya owned Y-Telecom, which was a vendor to World Telecom. While Barmawi was still employed at World Telecom, Barmawi and Sidya planned together to price World Telecom out of one of their most successful markets — the country of Mauritania. Barmawi prepared price-increase information for the Mauritania market and e- mailed it to Sidya for Sidya to send to World Telecom as if it had come from Sidya’s company, Y-Telecom. In the e-mail, Barmawi said that they needed to act now because Mauritania was World Telecom’s “bread and butter.” See Pl.’s Ex. 246. He warned Sidya to “not go forward[ing] this e-mail hahahaha.” Id. Later that day, Sidya e-mailed the pricing information to World Telecom as if it had come from him. In reply to the e-mail, Barmawi pretended that the increase was “shocking.” Pl.’s Ex. 95, at 4. At trial, Barmawi and Sidya claimed that the price increase was based upon a tax in Mauritania, but Barmawi admitted that it was “a business decision that [he] made to protect SBC.” Trial Tr. (Aug. 13, 2015) at 88-89. Sidya conceded that he knew Barmawi was “playing games” with World Telecom. Id. at 188. As a result of the scheme, World Telecom was forced to abandon all business in Mauritania, which was a “major, major problem for [World Telecom] with regards to revenue and cost.” Trial Tr. (Aug. 11, 2015) at 33-34. World Telecom presented evidence that Sidya and Barmawi recruited World Telecom’s employees and that these employees used World Telecom’s data and resources for SBC while they were still employed at World Telecom. Under Sidya’s direction, the CFO of World Telecom used World Telecom’s financial data at bank meetings for SBC while still employed for World Telecom. See Trial Tr. (Aug. 12, 2015) at 63-66, 69-74; Pl.’s Ex. 238; Pl.’s Ex. 262. 3 World Telecom also presented uncontradicted evidence of a data breach perpetrated by SBC’s employees. World Telecom stored its confidential data in a password-protected program called OrcaWave. This included data for its customers and vendors — pricing information, margins, costs, and route matrixes. OrcaWave was “the Holy Grail of the company.” Trial Tr. (Aug. 10, 2015) at 148. Before departing World Telecom for SBC, the chief technology officer, David Hart, created an unauthorized username and password for OrcaWave. At trial, Barmawi, Hart, and Jung Kim (another SBC employee) admitted that they had used this unauthorized username and password to regularly access World Telecom’s data. Hart also admitted that he had discussed the username with Sidya but had not given him the password. See Trial Tr. (Aug. 12, 2015) at 144-45. OrcaWave’s usage report showed that the unauthorized username was used over 850 times in a six-month period. World Telecom’s computer forensic analyst testified that the login information had been used by SBC employees Barmawi, Hart, Kim, and Satanand Atwaru. He also stated that he “would not agree” with the “suggestion that nothing ties Yacoub Sidya” to accessing the OrcaWave information because evidence indicated that the unauthorized username had been used in Mauritania (Sidya’s place of residence). Trial Tr. (Aug. 17, 2015) at 63-64. In its data breach, SBC employees accessed World Telecom’s margin reports, account history reports, rate addendum archives, and cost reports. These reports included information about the customers’ minutes, procedure ratios, revenue and cost margins, billing statuses, rates, and previous offers. World Telecom presented e-mails demonstrating that SBC employees had used this information to undercut World Telecom. See Trial Tr. (Aug. 12, 2015) at 127-29; Pl.’s Ex. 196; Pl.’s Ex. 229. The president of World Telecom testified that in the first six months of 4 2011, they could not understand why the company’s margins were being squeezed and why they were losing so many customers — until he discovered the data breach. World Telecom presented evidence from a research analyst who qualified as an expert in the wholesale telephony industry. He testified that the telephony industry was still a “viable market” with $92 billion of annual revenue, an average of 6-7 percent annual growth, and 15-18 percent annual growth in Africa and South Asia. Trial Tr. (Aug. 17, 2015) at 103-04. World Telecom also presented expert testimony as to the diminution in value of the business from December 2010 to December 2011. The expert opined that “the data reflected that there was a total destruction of the business” and that after the OrcaWave data breach, World Telecom was “never profitable again.” See id. at 120-21, 152. Given the evidence, the jury’s verdict was not plainly wrong or without evidence to support it. “Under Virginia’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act (VUTSA), an owner of ‘trade secrets’ may be entitled to damages when it can prove ‘misappropriation’ by another.” Babcock & Wilcox Co. v. Areva NP, Inc., 292 Va. 165, 205 (2016) (citation omitted). As to the trade-secrets count, Sidya does not deny the data breach that occurred through the unauthorized access to OrcaWave. Instead, he argues only that he knew nothing about it. The evidence, however, suggested otherwise. Hart testified that he told Sidya about the username, and the forensic analyst found that someone had logged in to OrcaWave with the unauthorized username and password multiple times from a computer in Mauritania. The jury reasonably distrusted Sidya’s claim of ignorance and inferred from the evidence that he was actively involved in the misappropriation of World Telecom’s trade secrets. As to the claim for tortious interference with a business expectancy, World Telecom needed to prove that Sidya had known of a World Telecom business expectancy and that he had 5 used improper means to intentionally interfere with that expectancy. See Preferred Sys. Sols., Inc. v. GP Consulting, LLC, 284 Va. 382, 403 (2012). The evidence demonstrates a number of business expectancies, including World Telecom’s ongoing relationships with its customers and vendors, that were interfered with by Sidya and his co-conspirators using confidential information from employees while they were still working at World Telecom and using confidential information from the OrcaWave database. The evidence thus supports the jury’s verdict on this count. Finally, to prove a civil conspiracy under Code § 18.2-499, “a plaintiff must establish: ‘(1) a combination of two or more persons for the purpose of willfully and maliciously injuring plaintiff in his business; and (2) resulting damage to plaintiff.’” Dunlap v. Cottman Transmission Sys., LLC, 287 Va. 207, 214 (2014) (alteration and citation omitted). Sidya and Barmawi deceived World Telecom in order to price them out of the Mauritania market, worked with an active employee of World Telecom to take and use World Telecom’s financial data, and used World Telecom’s confidential data to undercut World Telecom and steal customers for at least six months. These facts sufficiently proved a civil conspiracy by clear and convincing evidence. We also find that the evidence was sufficient to establish that Sidya’s actions caused harm to World Telecom under each of these counts. The testimony of both World Telecom’s owner and the damages expert identified the actions of Sidya and his co-conspirators as causing the destruction of World Telecom’s business. Having examined the facts and inferences in the light most favorable to World Telecom, we find that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s verdict on all three counts. 6