061146P.pdf   02/05/2007  Synergetics Inc.  v.  Charles Hurst et al.
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  06-1146
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis   
   [PUBLISHED] [Shepherd, Author, with Melloy and Benton, Circuit Judges]
   Civil case - contracts. In action against former employees for breach of
   employment contracts and misappropriation of trade secrets, the district
   court did not err in denying defendants' motion to limine to exclude the
   testimony of employer's damages expert; the district court did not err in
   determining that the expert's methodology was supported by the evidence
   and was scientifically valid, and defendants had a full opportunity to
   challenge his assumptions and methodology in their cross-examination
   and present their own theory; after a full trial on the merits, the court
   would not review the district court's decision not to grant defendants'
   motion for summary judgment, as such a denial is interlocutory in nature;
   district court did not err in denying defendants' motion for judgment as a
   matter of law; confidentiality agreements were enforceable; evidence was
   sufficient to support the claim defendants intentionally interfered with a
   contract or business relationship; viewed in the light most favorable to
   the verdict, evidence was sufficient to support finding defendants'
   breached their fiduciary duty to plaintiff; district court did not err in
   denying motion for remittitur as the award for actual damages does not
   shock the court's conscience and is supported by the evidence; punitive
   damage award was not so disproportionate as to warrant reversal; two-
   year injunctive period was appropriate given evidence on how long it
   would have taken defendants to develop the product had they not
   misappropriated plaintiff's trade secrets and scientific data.