In Hicklin Engineering v.R.J.Bartell,where Bartell quit working for Hicklin and formed a company that competed with Hicklin,which then sued Bartell for theft of trade secrets,the appeals court held that:
A)a reasonable jury could find that Bartell knew that some of the data Hicklin provided him was considered trade secrets
B)a reasonable jury could not find that Bartell knew that some of the data Hicklin provided him was considered trade secrets
C)a reasonable jury could find that Hicklin knew that some of the data Bartell provided was considered trade secrets
D)a reasonable jury could find that Bartell knew that some of the data Hicklin provided him was patented
E)none of the other choices are correct

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The appeals court held that a reasonable jury could find that Bartell knew that some of the data Hicklin provided him was considered trade secrets. This suggests that there was evidence presented that Bartell was aware that the information he received from Hicklin was sensitive and valuable, and that he may have used this information to benefit his own competing company.

In Hicklin Engineering V