## Facts

- Megabyte International, Inc. distributed computer-hardware components and employed DeGiorgio as a salesman for several months.
- DeGiorgio left Megabyte to work for American Megabyte Distributors, Inc. (AMDI), a newly formed competitor.
- Megabyte alleged DeGiorgio had been given lists of Megabyte’s top customers and vendors, containing specific information about them.
- After DeGiorgio stopped coming to work, Megabyte searched his desk and could not find the customer lists.
- Megabyte’s president and executive vice-president testified that, after DeGiorgio left, Megabyte received numerous customer complaints about DeGiorgio’s activities from top customers not identifiable through phone books or commercial lists.
- Megabyte found in DeGiorgio’s desk a single-page fax listing Megabyte’s top vendors, addressed to AMDI’s president and dated May 1, 1995.
- Megabyte’s fax records showed a single-page fax was sent on May 1, 1995 to the same number shown on the fax found in DeGiorgio’s desk.
- DeGiorgio admitted preparing the fax but denied sending it.
- Megabyte sought and obtained an interlocutory injunction under the Georgia Trade Secrets Act restricting DeGiorgio and AMDI from using the customer and vendor lists.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by granting an interlocutory injunction when appellants claimed there was no evidence of misappropriation.
2. Whether Megabyte’s customer and vendor lists constituted trade secrets under the Georgia Trade Secrets Act sufficient to support interlocutory injunctive relief.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the interlocutory injunction.
- The court held the record contained some evidence supporting misappropriation, so the trial court acted within its discretion in granting interim relief.
- The court held the customer and vendor lists qualified as trade secrets because they were not readily ascertainable from public sources and were obtainable from Megabyte’s business records.

## Legal Principles

- An interlocutory injunction will be upheld where the record contains some evidence supporting the trial court’s findings; appellate review is for abuse of discretion.
- In trade-secret injunction disputes, circumstantial evidence (including missing confidential materials, corroborated transmission records, and customer complaints tied to non-public contacts) may support an inference of misappropriation at the interlocutory stage.
- Under the Georgia Trade Secrets Act, customer and vendor lists may be protected as trade secrets when they contain competitively valuable, specific information and are not generally known or readily ascertainable from public directories or commercial lists.
- Evidence offered to show the fact and nature of customer complaints may be admissible to support interlocutory relief in this context.

## Conclusion

The court upheld interim injunctive protection because the evidence permitted an inference that DeGiorgio and AMDI used Megabyte’s non-public customer and vendor information, and the curated lists were trade secrets under the Georgia Trade Secrets Act.


DeGiorgio v. Megabyte Int'l, Inc., 266 Ga. 539, 468 S.E.2d 367 (Ga. 1996)