Court Opinion

ID: 9647448
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 13:36:54.917799+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:02:52.922691
License: Public Domain

DEL SOLE, Judge,
concurring and dissenting:
I join the majority opinion in all respects except one. I would not reverse the award of punitive damages. The defendants in this case were found to have acted intentionally and I believe that the trial court properly set forth its basis for punitive damages in its opinion when it stated:
*260Mr. Wingrove’s complete disregard of his duty of loyalty to SHV, his manipulative diversion of the Eastman Kodak at Rochester account, his dual employment with a competitor, his attempted and completed spiriting away of needed employees, his defaming the business reputation of SHV, and the taking of SHV customer lists to enrich himself and SHV’s competitor, ContiCoal, were based on malice and were directed by ContiCoal. These acts were clearly outrageous and are the adequate basis for the Court to award punitive damages upon both Mr. Win-grove and ContiCoal.
I would find that the evidence in the record supports the findings and conclusions by the trial court.