## Facts

- Karen Tate, an operating-room nurse, identified a recurring surgical problem: delicate sutures were protected by improvised catheter tubing pieces that were difficult to track and not radiopaque.
- Tate conceived a product concept for pre-cut clamp tips made of radiopaque material, packaged in an accountable number, to protect sutures during surgery.
- Tate met with Scanlan International, Inc. (SII) and its president to disclose the concept under an understanding of confidentiality and that she would be compensated if SII used the idea.
- SII later developed and marketed “Suture Boots,” clamp-end tips that implemented the core features of Tate’s concept.
- The parties did not execute a written royalty agreement; negotiations over compensation failed.
- Tate sued on multiple theories, including express contract, implied-in-fact contract, unjust enrichment, conversion, and breach of confidence.
- At trial, expert testimony indicated that in medical-product marketing an idea can be “concrete” if well-defined and actionable, even without a working prototype.
- A jury found Tate’s idea novel and concrete, disclosed in confidence, used by SII pursuant to an agreement to compensate Tate upon successful use, and breached by nonpayment; damages exceeded $500,000.
- The trial court denied SII’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV), and SII appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether sufficient evidence supported the jury’s finding that Tate’s disclosed idea was commercially novel and sufficiently concrete to support recovery.
2. Whether sufficient evidence supported the existence and enforceability of an express or implied-in-fact agreement to compensate Tate if SII used the idea.
3. Whether the trial court erred in denying JNOV under the governing evidentiary standard.

## Decision

- The Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment for Tate and the denial of JNOV.
- The court held the record contained sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to find Tate’s idea novel and concrete.
- The court held the evidence supported a finding that SII accepted the disclosure under circumstances permitting an inference of an agreement—express or implied-in-fact—to compensate Tate if it used the idea.
- The court held conflicts in testimony and competing inferences were for the jury, and the evidence was not so one-sided as to justify JNOV.

## Legal Principles

- An unpatented idea may be compensable under contract principles when the idea is commercially novel, sufficiently concrete, and disclosed to a recipient who agrees—expressly or impliedly—to pay if the idea is used.
- “Concreteness” in an idea-submission context does not require a prototype; it may be satisfied by a well-defined, actionable concept that enables development, even if later engineering details are supplied by the recipient.
- An implied-in-fact agreement to compensate may be inferred from the parties’ conduct and surrounding circumstances when an idea is disclosed in confidence and then used commercially.
- JNOV is improper where substantial evidence supports the verdict and reasonable factfinders could differ; credibility determinations and weighing of evidence remain with the jury.

## Conclusion

The court upheld a jury’s determination that Tate’s confidentially disclosed surgical-product concept was novel and concrete and that SII’s commercialization of a product embodying that concept supported liability under an express or implied-in-fact agreement to compensate, making JNOV unwarranted.


Tate v. Scanlan Int’l, Inc., 403 N.W.2d 666 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987)