Preview
FILED
MARY L. SWAIN
BUTLER COUNTY
CLERK OF COURTS
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS 09/16/2022 11:46 AM
BUTLER COUNTY, OHIO CV 2022 08 1578
LIVE WIRE PARTNERS, LLC, : CASE NO.:
C/O Greg D. Porter, Esq.
5103 Pleasant Avenue
Fairfield, OH 45014
JUDGE
Plaintiff,
-vs-
CHARLES BEYERSDOERFER : COMPLAINT FOR PERMANENT.
413 Charlberth Drive INJUNTIVE RELIEF AND OTHER
Hamilton, OH 45013 : RELIEF
-and-
CHUCK BEYERS MEDIA LLC
C/O Statutory Agent:
Charles Beyersdoerfer : (Jury Demand Endorsed hereon)
413 Charlberth Drive
Hamilton, OH 45013
Defendants.
NOW COMES Plaintiff, Live Wire Partners, LLC (“LWP”), by and through counsel, and
for its Complaint against Defendants Charles Beyersdoerfer (“Chuck”) and Chuck Beyers Media
LLC (“CBM”) for permanent injunctive relief, and other relief, hereby states as follows:
PARTIES & JURISDICTION
1. LWP is a limited liability company, operating and existing under the laws of the state of
Ohio, with its principal place of business located in the city of Fairfield in Butler County,
Ohio.. Chuck is a resident of Ohio who, upon information and belief, resides in the City of
Hamilton in Butler County, Ohio.
. CBM is a limited liability company, operating and existing under the laws of the state of
Ohio, and, upon information and belief, with its principal place of business located in the
city of Hamilton in Butler County, Ohio.
. The Butler County Common Pleas Court has jurisdiction over Plaintiff's claims since they
arise under common law and statutory law of the State of Ohio and seek damages in an
amount greater than $25,000.00 (Twenty-Five Thousand and 00/100 dollars), exclusive of
costs, attorneys’ fees, and other equitable relief sought herein.
. Venue is proper in Butler County, Ohio given that all actions complained of herein
occurred in Butler County, Ohio, and given that all parties hereto reside in Butler County,
Ohio or have their principal place of business in Butler County, Ohio.
COUNT I- BREACH OF CONTRACT
(AGAINST CHUCK)
. All allegations in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated as if fully restated herein.
. On or about February 22, 2018, Chuck was brought on by LWP as an independent
contractor, and executed his signature on an Independent Contractor NON-COMPETE
AGREEMENT (“the Agreement”), attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
. Chuck’s obligations, among others, were to include overseeing sales, making sales, and
performing other aspects of securing digital media and other advertising contracts with
potential clients as well as continuing to provide customer service to current clients.
. Chuck knew, at the time he signed the Agreement, that a majority of the LWP’s clients
were restaurants and that LWP had reputable list of clients in the restaurant industry.10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
Chuck, knowing this, agreed to be an independent contractor and take on the above-listed
obligations and responsibilities and further indicated his understanding by executing his
signature on the Agreement, which provided he would have a duty of loyalty not to compete
with LWP during and immediately after his contract period.
The Agreement consisted of sufficient consideration in that Chuck would receive
compensation for his duties and obligations.
Upon information and belief, in the early part of the year 2022, Chuck knew he would be
terminating his relationship with LWP soon but failed to disclose this to LWP.
At or about the same time as referenced above, and upon information and belief, Chuck
began actively soliciting current clients of LWP, as well as prospective clients of LWP,
while still pretending to uphold his duty of loyalty as this was all done without LWP’s
knowledge.
Some of the active solicitation was believed to have taken place while at offices provided
by LWP and on LWP’s telephone lines.
During the active solicitation, it is believed Chuck notified potential and current clients that
he would be leaving and opening his own advertising company with better rates and better
services than LWP’s.
In or around the end of July of 2022, Chuck notified LWP that he was leaving and his
relationship with LWP was terminated.
Only a matter of days thereafter, LWP began to lose current clients and prospective clients
to CBM.
CBM was incorporated by Chuck in May of 2022, around the time LWP believed him to
be actively soliciting clients away from LWP, prior to him notifying LWP that he intendedto terminate their relationship, and, subsequently, while he still owed LWP a duty of
confidentiality, loyalty, and his obligation not to compete.
19, By virtue of his employment with CBM, it is inevitable that Chuck will use or disclose
LWbP’s confidential information in violation of the Agreement.
20. As a direct and proximate result of Chuck’s breaches of the Agreement, LWP will suffer
irreparable harm including the loss of revenue, the loss of its competitive position, the loss
of business good-will, the loss of its confidential information, and the loss of investment
in time and energy in generating the foregoing.
21. LWP is entitled to permanent injunctive relief enjoining and restraining Chuck from
engaging in any conduct that would violate the Agreement.
22. Asa direct and proximate result of Chuck’s breaches of the Agreement, LWP has been and
will be damaged in a monetary amount to be proven at trial, but in no event less than
$25,000.00 (Twenty-Five Thousand and 00/100 Dollars), exclusive of costs, attorneys’
fees, and other equitable relief sought herein.
COUNT H—MISAPPROPRIATION OF TRADE SECRETS UNDER OHIO LAW
(AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS)
23. All allegations in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated as if fully restated herein.
24. LWP is the tristate area’s pioneer of digital marketing.
25. LWP, to the best of its knowledge, has created multiple digital marketing platforms that
were brand new to the area and never used before.
26. During his relationship with LWP, including his role as sales manager, Chuck gained
knowledge of LWP’s confidential information, which constitutes trade secrets within the
meaning of Section 1333.61(D) of the Ohio Revised Code.27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33
34,
LWP derives independent economic value from these trade secrets not being generally
known. LWP undertakes efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain
their secrecy, including, but not limited to, entering into agreements to protect the
confidentiality of this information.
These trade secrets are uniquely valuable to LWP.
Chuck has statutory and contractual obligations not to use or disclose LWP’s trade secrets.
Ohio Revised Code Section 1333.62(A) provides that “{a]ctual or threatened
misappropriation may be enjoined.”
By virtue of his employment with CBM, a business advertising as a digital marketing
company, it is inevitable that Chuck will use or disclose LWP’s trade secrets in violation
of Ohio law.
As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ misappropriation of LWP’s trade secrets,
LWP will suffer irreparable harm including the loss of revenue, the loss of its competitive
position, the loss of business good-will, the loss of its confidential information, and the
loss of investment in time and energy in generating the foregoing.
. LWP is entitled to permanent injunctive relief enjoining and restraining Defendants from
misappropriating its trade secrets.
As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ actions, LWP has been and will be
damaged in a monetary amount to be proven at trial, but in no event less than $25,000.00
(Twenty-Five Thousand and 00/100 Dollars), exclusive of costs, attorneys’ fees, and other
equitable relief sought herein.
COUNT III - TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH CONTRACT
(AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS)35,
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
All allegations in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated as if fully restated herein.
CBM and Chuck were aware of LWP’s contractual relationship with Chuck, and LWP’s
contractual relationships with its current clients.
Without justification or privilege, CBM wrongfully and intentionally procured the breach
of LWP’s contractual relationship with Chuck by entering into an employment relationship
with him that violates the Agreement.
Without justification or privilege, CBM and Chuck wrongfully and intentionally procured
the breach of LWP’s contractual relationship with various current clients and/or
prospective clients.
CBM has willfully and intentionally interfered with LWP’s contractual relationship with
Chuck in an unjustified and improper manner.
Chuck and CBM have willfully and intentionally interfered with LWP’s contractual
relationships with LWP’s current and prospective clients in an unjustified and improper
manner.
As a direct and proximate result of CBM’s and Chuck’s conduct as described in the
preceding paragraphs, LWP will suffer irreparable harm including the loss of revenue, the
loss of its competitive position, the loss of business good-will, the loss of its confidential
information, and the loss of investment in time and energy in generating the foregoing.
. Asa direct and proximate result of CBM’s and Chuck’s actions, LWP has been and/or will
be damaged in a monetary amount to be proven at trial, but in no event less than $25,000.00
(Twenty-Five Thousand and 00/100 Dollars), exclusive of costs, attorneys’ fees, and other
equitable relief sought herein.DAMAGES
WHEREFORE, LWP respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in its favor and
against Chuck and CBM as follows:
(1) Prohibiting Chuck from acting as an employee or agent of CBM for a period of two (2)
years from the date of termination of his contractual relationship with LWP;
(2) If it is determined that CBM is a single-member limited liability company owned solely
by Chuck, then prohibiting Chuck from operating a business similar to LWP’s for a
period of two (2) years from the date of termination of his contractual relations with
LWP;
(3) Prohibiting all Defendants and any other person or entity acting in aid or concern, or in
participation with them from using or disclosing any of LWP’s confidential information
or trade secrets;
(4) Prohibiting CBM from employing, retaining, or otherwise compensating Chuck for a
period of two (2) years from the date of the termination of his contractual relationship
with LWP and from otherwise interfering with LWP’s agreements with Chuck;
(5) Prohibiting Chuck from engaging in any other conduct that would otherwise violate his
agreements with LWP;
(6) That any breached provision of Chuck’s agreements with LWP are tolled for the
amount of time during which he was in breach;
(7) That LWP be awarded compensatory damages in an amount to be proven at trial, but
in no event less than $25,000.00 (Twenty-Five Thousand and 00/100 Dollars);
(8) That LWP be awarded punitive damages in an amount to be proven at trial;
(9) That LWP be awarded its reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs; and,(10) Such other relief as the court may consider just and proper and that Plaintiff may
be entitled to in law or in equity.
Respectfully Submitted,
RopRiIGUEZ & PORTER, LTD.
s/ Greg D. Porter
Greg D, Porter (OH# 0089516)
Attorney for Plaintiff
5103 Pleasant Avenue
Fairfield, OH 45014
(513) 407-0000
(513) 795-7917 (fax)
GPorterLaw@gmail.com
PRAECIPE TO CLERK
Please serve summons and a copy of the Complaint upon the following Defendants at the
following addresses by certified mail, return receipt requested:
CHARLES BEYERSDOERFER Chuck Beyers Media LLC
413 Charlberth Drive C/O Statutory Agent:
Hamilton, OH 45013 Charles Beyersdoerfer
413 Charlberth Drive
Hamilton, OH 45013
s/ Greg D. Porter
Greg D. Porter (OH# 0089516)
Attomey for Plaintiff
JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff hereby demands a Jury Trial for all issues so triable.
s/ Greg D. Porter
Greg D. Porter (OH# 0089516)
Attorney for Plaintiff8/3/22, 10:00 AM image_123986672.JPG
5:39 4
4 Search
X Non-Compete.pdf Q &
independent Contractor NON-COMPETE AGREEMENT
For good consideration and as an inducement for Live Wire Partners (Company)
to Hire independent Contractor Chuck Bayersdoerfer (IC), the undersigned
independent Contractor hereby agrees not to directly or indirectly compete with
the business of the Company and its successors and assigns during the period of
employment and for a period of 2 years following termination of employment and
not with standing the cause or reason for termination.
‘The term “not compete” as used herein shall mean that the Independent
Contractor shall not own, manage, operate, consult or be employed in a business.
substantially similar to, or competitive with, the present business of the Company
‘or such other business activity in which the Company may substantially engage
during the term of independent Contractor,
‘The Independent Contractor acknowledges that the Campany shall or may in
raliance of this agreement provide Independent Contractor to trade secrets,
‘customers and other confidential data and good will. Independent Contractor
‘agrees to retain said information as confidential and not to use said information
on his or her own behalf or disclose same to any third party.
‘This non-compete agreement shall extend only for @ radius of the United States
500 miles from the present location of the Company and shall be in full force and
effect for Five years, commencing with the date of independent Contractor
termination.
This agreement shail be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parlies, their
succassors, assigns, and personal representatives,
Signed this 22th day February 2011
AX
%
Coffiractor
EXHIBIT
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=rm&ogbl#advanced-search/subsel=ast&has=nathan%4Olivewiremediapartners.co} 41
Preview
FILED MARY L. SWAIN BUTLER COUNTY CLERK OF COURTS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS 09/16/2022 11:46 AM BUTLER COUNTY, OHIO CV 2022 08 1578 LIVE WIRE PARTNERS, LLC, : CASE NO.: C/O Greg D. Porter, Esq. 5103 Pleasant Avenue Fairfield, OH 45014 JUDGE Plaintiff, -vs- CHARLES BEYERSDOERFER : COMPLAINT FOR PERMANENT. 413 Charlberth Drive INJUNTIVE RELIEF AND OTHER Hamilton, OH 45013 : RELIEF -and- CHUCK BEYERS MEDIA LLC C/O Statutory Agent: Charles Beyersdoerfer : (Jury Demand Endorsed hereon) 413 Charlberth Drive Hamilton, OH 45013 Defendants. NOW COMES Plaintiff, Live Wire Partners, LLC (“LWP”), by and through counsel, and for its Complaint against Defendants Charles Beyersdoerfer (“Chuck”) and Chuck Beyers Media LLC (“CBM”) for permanent injunctive relief, and other relief, hereby states as follows: PARTIES & JURISDICTION 1. LWP is a limited liability company, operating and existing under the laws of the state of Ohio, with its principal place of business located in the city of Fairfield in Butler County, Ohio.. Chuck is a resident of Ohio who, upon information and belief, resides in the City of Hamilton in Butler County, Ohio. . CBM is a limited liability company, operating and existing under the laws of the state of Ohio, and, upon information and belief, with its principal place of business located in the city of Hamilton in Butler County, Ohio. . The Butler County Common Pleas Court has jurisdiction over Plaintiff's claims since they arise under common law and statutory law of the State of Ohio and seek damages in an amount greater than $25,000.00 (Twenty-Five Thousand and 00/100 dollars), exclusive of costs, attorneys’ fees, and other equitable relief sought herein. . Venue is proper in Butler County, Ohio given that all actions complained of herein occurred in Butler County, Ohio, and given that all parties hereto reside in Butler County, Ohio or have their principal place of business in Butler County, Ohio. COUNT I- BREACH OF CONTRACT (AGAINST CHUCK) . All allegations in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated as if fully restated herein. . On or about February 22, 2018, Chuck was brought on by LWP as an independent contractor, and executed his signature on an Independent Contractor NON-COMPETE AGREEMENT (“the Agreement”), attached hereto as Exhibit 1. . Chuck’s obligations, among others, were to include overseeing sales, making sales, and performing other aspects of securing digital media and other advertising contracts with potential clients as well as continuing to provide customer service to current clients. . Chuck knew, at the time he signed the Agreement, that a majority of the LWP’s clients were restaurants and that LWP had reputable list of clients in the restaurant industry.10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. Chuck, knowing this, agreed to be an independent contractor and take on the above-listed obligations and responsibilities and further indicated his understanding by executing his signature on the Agreement, which provided he would have a duty of loyalty not to compete with LWP during and immediately after his contract period. The Agreement consisted of sufficient consideration in that Chuck would receive compensation for his duties and obligations. Upon information and belief, in the early part of the year 2022, Chuck knew he would be terminating his relationship with LWP soon but failed to disclose this to LWP. At or about the same time as referenced above, and upon information and belief, Chuck began actively soliciting current clients of LWP, as well as prospective clients of LWP, while still pretending to uphold his duty of loyalty as this was all done without LWP’s knowledge. Some of the active solicitation was believed to have taken place while at offices provided by LWP and on LWP’s telephone lines. During the active solicitation, it is believed Chuck notified potential and current clients that he would be leaving and opening his own advertising company with better rates and better services than LWP’s. In or around the end of July of 2022, Chuck notified LWP that he was leaving and his relationship with LWP was terminated. Only a matter of days thereafter, LWP began to lose current clients and prospective clients to CBM. CBM was incorporated by Chuck in May of 2022, around the time LWP believed him to be actively soliciting clients away from LWP, prior to him notifying LWP that he intendedto terminate their relationship, and, subsequently, while he still owed LWP a duty of confidentiality, loyalty, and his obligation not to compete. 19, By virtue of his employment with CBM, it is inevitable that Chuck will use or disclose LWbP’s confidential information in violation of the Agreement. 20. As a direct and proximate result of Chuck’s breaches of the Agreement, LWP will suffer irreparable harm including the loss of revenue, the loss of its competitive position, the loss of business good-will, the loss of its confidential information, and the loss of investment in time and energy in generating the foregoing. 21. LWP is entitled to permanent injunctive relief enjoining and restraining Chuck from engaging in any conduct that would violate the Agreement. 22. Asa direct and proximate result of Chuck’s breaches of the Agreement, LWP has been and will be damaged in a monetary amount to be proven at trial, but in no event less than $25,000.00 (Twenty-Five Thousand and 00/100 Dollars), exclusive of costs, attorneys’ fees, and other equitable relief sought herein. COUNT H—MISAPPROPRIATION OF TRADE SECRETS UNDER OHIO LAW (AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS) 23. All allegations in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated as if fully restated herein. 24. LWP is the tristate area’s pioneer of digital marketing. 25. LWP, to the best of its knowledge, has created multiple digital marketing platforms that were brand new to the area and never used before. 26. During his relationship with LWP, including his role as sales manager, Chuck gained knowledge of LWP’s confidential information, which constitutes trade secrets within the meaning of Section 1333.61(D) of the Ohio Revised Code.27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33 34, LWP derives independent economic value from these trade secrets not being generally known. LWP undertakes efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain their secrecy, including, but not limited to, entering into agreements to protect the confidentiality of this information. These trade secrets are uniquely valuable to LWP. Chuck has statutory and contractual obligations not to use or disclose LWP’s trade secrets. Ohio Revised Code Section 1333.62(A) provides that “{a]ctual or threatened misappropriation may be enjoined.” By virtue of his employment with CBM, a business advertising as a digital marketing company, it is inevitable that Chuck will use or disclose LWP’s trade secrets in violation of Ohio law. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ misappropriation of LWP’s trade secrets, LWP will suffer irreparable harm including the loss of revenue, the loss of its competitive position, the loss of business good-will, the loss of its confidential information, and the loss of investment in time and energy in generating the foregoing. . LWP is entitled to permanent injunctive relief enjoining and restraining Defendants from misappropriating its trade secrets. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ actions, LWP has been and will be damaged in a monetary amount to be proven at trial, but in no event less than $25,000.00 (Twenty-Five Thousand and 00/100 Dollars), exclusive of costs, attorneys’ fees, and other equitable relief sought herein. COUNT III - TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH CONTRACT (AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS)35, 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. All allegations in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated as if fully restated herein. CBM and Chuck were aware of LWP’s contractual relationship with Chuck, and LWP’s contractual relationships with its current clients. Without justification or privilege, CBM wrongfully and intentionally procured the breach of LWP’s contractual relationship with Chuck by entering into an employment relationship with him that violates the Agreement. Without justification or privilege, CBM and Chuck wrongfully and intentionally procured the breach of LWP’s contractual relationship with various current clients and/or prospective clients. CBM has willfully and intentionally interfered with LWP’s contractual relationship with Chuck in an unjustified and improper manner. Chuck and CBM have willfully and intentionally interfered with LWP’s contractual relationships with LWP’s current and prospective clients in an unjustified and improper manner. As a direct and proximate result of CBM’s and Chuck’s conduct as described in the preceding paragraphs, LWP will suffer irreparable harm including the loss of revenue, the loss of its competitive position, the loss of business good-will, the loss of its confidential information, and the loss of investment in time and energy in generating the foregoing. . Asa direct and proximate result of CBM’s and Chuck’s actions, LWP has been and/or will be damaged in a monetary amount to be proven at trial, but in no event less than $25,000.00 (Twenty-Five Thousand and 00/100 Dollars), exclusive of costs, attorneys’ fees, and other equitable relief sought herein.DAMAGES WHEREFORE, LWP respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in its favor and against Chuck and CBM as follows: (1) Prohibiting Chuck from acting as an employee or agent of CBM for a period of two (2) years from the date of termination of his contractual relationship with LWP; (2) If it is determined that CBM is a single-member limited liability company owned solely by Chuck, then prohibiting Chuck from operating a business similar to LWP’s for a period of two (2) years from the date of termination of his contractual relations with LWP; (3) Prohibiting all Defendants and any other person or entity acting in aid or concern, or in participation with them from using or disclosing any of LWP’s confidential information or trade secrets; (4) Prohibiting CBM from employing, retaining, or otherwise compensating Chuck for a period of two (2) years from the date of the termination of his contractual relationship with LWP and from otherwise interfering with LWP’s agreements with Chuck; (5) Prohibiting Chuck from engaging in any other conduct that would otherwise violate his agreements with LWP; (6) That any breached provision of Chuck’s agreements with LWP are tolled for the amount of time during which he was in breach; (7) That LWP be awarded compensatory damages in an amount to be proven at trial, but in no event less than $25,000.00 (Twenty-Five Thousand and 00/100 Dollars); (8) That LWP be awarded punitive damages in an amount to be proven at trial; (9) That LWP be awarded its reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs; and,(10) Such other relief as the court may consider just and proper and that Plaintiff may be entitled to in law or in equity. Respectfully Submitted, RopRiIGUEZ & PORTER, LTD. s/ Greg D. Porter Greg D, Porter (OH# 0089516) Attorney for Plaintiff 5103 Pleasant Avenue Fairfield, OH 45014 (513) 407-0000 (513) 795-7917 (fax) GPorterLaw@gmail.com PRAECIPE TO CLERK Please serve summons and a copy of the Complaint upon the following Defendants at the following addresses by certified mail, return receipt requested: CHARLES BEYERSDOERFER Chuck Beyers Media LLC 413 Charlberth Drive C/O Statutory Agent: Hamilton, OH 45013 Charles Beyersdoerfer 413 Charlberth Drive Hamilton, OH 45013 s/ Greg D. Porter Greg D. Porter (OH# 0089516) Attomey for Plaintiff JURY DEMAND Plaintiff hereby demands a Jury Trial for all issues so triable. s/ Greg D. Porter Greg D. Porter (OH# 0089516) Attorney for Plaintiff8/3/22, 10:00 AM image_123986672.JPG 5:39 4 4 Search X Non-Compete.pdf Q & independent Contractor NON-COMPETE AGREEMENT For good consideration and as an inducement for Live Wire Partners (Company) to Hire independent Contractor Chuck Bayersdoerfer (IC), the undersigned independent Contractor hereby agrees not to directly or indirectly compete with the business of the Company and its successors and assigns during the period of employment and for a period of 2 years following termination of employment and not with standing the cause or reason for termination. ‘The term “not compete” as used herein shall mean that the Independent Contractor shall not own, manage, operate, consult or be employed in a business. substantially similar to, or competitive with, the present business of the Company ‘or such other business activity in which the Company may substantially engage during the term of independent Contractor, ‘The Independent Contractor acknowledges that the Campany shall or may in raliance of this agreement provide Independent Contractor to trade secrets, ‘customers and other confidential data and good will. Independent Contractor ‘agrees to retain said information as confidential and not to use said information on his or her own behalf or disclose same to any third party. ‘This non-compete agreement shall extend only for @ radius of the United States 500 miles from the present location of the Company and shall be in full force and effect for Five years, commencing with the date of independent Contractor termination. This agreement shail be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parlies, their succassors, assigns, and personal representatives, Signed this 22th day February 2011 AX % Coffiractor EXHIBIT https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=rm&ogbl#advanced-search/subsel=ast&has=nathan%4Olivewiremediapartners.co} 41