O'Reilly v. Musk
Filed 9/28/10 O'Reilly v. Musk CA6
California
Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or
relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except
as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This
opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for
purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN
THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SIXTH
APPELLATE DISTRICT
JOHN O'REILLY,
Plaintiff and
Appellant,
v.
ELON MUSK,
Defendant and Respondent.
H034863
(Santa Clara
County
Super.Ct.No. CV083172)
John
O'Reilly filed suit in April 2007 alleging, inter alia, a claim of
misappropriation of trade secrets against Elon Musk. The alleged misconduct occurred in 1995, but O'Reilly
claimed that he did not learn of it until 2005.
The court, concluding that any claim that might be asserted belonged to
O'Reilly's former employer, Remote Telecom, Inc. (RTI), a suspended
corporation, granted Musk's motion for summary judgment.
O'Reilly
contends on appeal that the court erred in granting summary judgment. We will affirm the judgment.
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
O'Reilly filed
this action against Musk on April 4,
2007. In July 2007, as a
self-represented litigant, he filed the operative pleading, the second amended
complaint (complaint). O'Reilly alleged[1] that in
October 1995, he met with Musk, who claimed at the time to have been a student
at Stanford University,
to discuss the possibility of working as a salesman of O'Reilly's Internet
Merchant Channel (IMC), selling advertising to merchants. IMC â€
| Description | John O'Reilly filed suit in April 2007 alleging, inter alia, a claim of misappropriation of trade secrets against Elon Musk. The alleged misconduct occurred in 1995, but O'Reilly claimed that he did not learn of it until 2005. The court, concluding that any claim that might be asserted belonged to O'Reilly's former employer, Remote Telecom, Inc. (RTI), a suspended corporation, granted Musk's motion for summary judgment. O'Reilly contends on appeal that the court erred in granting summary judgment. Court will affirm the judgment. |
| Rating |
