throbber
Case 2:21-cv-01339 Document 1 Filed 03/19/21 Page 1 of 38
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
`
`
`
`__________________________________________
`KBS Pharmacy, Inc.
`
`
`
`:
`d/b/a Bensalem Pharmacy
`
`
`
`:
`2112 Street Road
`
`
`
`
`:
`Bensalem, Pennsylvania 19020
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`vs.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`Jigar Patel
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`1316 Cheltenham Drive
`Bensalem, Pennsylvania 19020
`
`
`
`
`
`Sima Patel
`
`
`
`1316 Cheltenham Drive
`Bensalem, Pennsylvania 19020
`
`
`
`
`
`Christine Crager
`
`
`3517 Oakmont Street
`
`Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19136
`
`
`
`
`
`And
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Smart Choice Pharmacy
`
`1941 Street Road
`
`
`Bensalem, Pennsylvania 19020
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendants
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CIVIL ACTION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT AND DEMAND
`FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`:
`:
`
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`KBS Pharmacy, Inc. d/b/a Bensalem Pharmacy by and through its Complaint against the
`
`Defendants, Jigar Patel, Sima Patel, Christine Crager and Smart Choice Pharmacy (collectively
`
`the “Defendants”) states:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-01339 Document 1 Filed 03/19/21 Page 2 of 38
`
`
`
`Introduction
`
`1.
`
`This case is initiated by KBS Pharmacy, Inc. (hereinafter “KBS” or “Plaintiff”)
`
`against its former employees Jigar Patel, Christine Crager, as well as Sima Patel (Jigar Patel’s
`
`wife), and Smart Choice Pharmacy for inter alia:
`
`(a) Violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act 18 U.S.C. §1030 (the
`“CFAA”).
`
`
`
`(b) Breach of contract.
`
`(c) Breach of fiduciary duty.
`
`(d) Theft and misappropriation of confidential and trade secret information;
`
`(d) Breach of the duty of loyalty.
`
`interference with contract, business
`(e) Intentional
`prospective economic advantage; and
`
`relations and
`
`
`(f) Unfair trade practices.
`
`For almost a decade, Jigar Patel (“Jigar”) and Christine Crager (“Crager”) were
`
`2.
`
`employed by the Plaintiff. Jigar was employed by the Plaintiff as the lead pharmacist while Crager
`
`was employed as a pharmacy technician. Jigar and Crager were, for all intents and purposes,
`
`charged with overseeing the pharmacy’s day-to-day operation.
`
`3.
`
`In their capacity as employees of the Plaintiff, these two defendants had access to
`
`confidential and proprietary information of the Plaintiff, including patient and customer
`
`information. As a result, both Jigar and Crager executed comprehensive Confidentiality
`
`Agreements and acknowledged as a condition of employment the terms of an Employee
`
`Handbook, which expressly prohibited their misuse of such material.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-01339 Document 1 Filed 03/19/21 Page 3 of 38
`
`4.
`
`In 2018, Jigar Patel expressed an interest in purchasing the pharmacy from the
`
`Plaintiff. See Exhibits A & B. However, while Jigar and Plaintiff’s owner, Kaushal Patel,
`
`discussed “purchase” terms the Defendants were actually conspiring to:
`
`(i) Access Plaintiff’s computer system and download protected and
`confidential information concerning patients and their medication
`requirements.
`
`(ii) Recruit patients to leave the Plaintiff’s pharmacy.
`
`(iii) Negotiate, lease, and fit-out leased space less than 100 yards
`from Plaintiff’s location.
`
`(iv) Negotiate vendor and supplier contracts based on the
`confidential information they misappropriated from the Plaintiff’s
`business; and
`
`(v) Exit the business in such a manner to maximize disruption to
`the Plaintiff's business operation and leave it unable to support
`customer immediate needs.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5.
`
`After opening Smart Choice Pharmacy less than 100 yards from Plaintiff's
`
`operation, the Defendants used the confidential and trade secret information they had stolen from
`
`Plaintiff’s business to recruit Plaintiff's customers.
`
`6.
`
`Due to the Defendants’ theft of confidential and trade secret information almost
`
`70% of the Plaintiff’s customers transferred their business to Smart Choice Pharmacy within weeks
`
`of the defendant's opening. Based on the Defendants' illegal and intentional misconduct, Plaintiff
`
`seeks compensatory and punitive damages, equitable and injunctive relief. In support, Plaintiff
`
`avers as follows:
`
`The Parties
`
`
`
`7.
`
`Plaintiff is a corporation organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of
`
`Pennsylvania with its offices located at 2112 Street Road Bensalem, Pennsylvania 19020.
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-01339 Document 1 Filed 03/19/21 Page 4 of 38
`
`8.
`
`Defendant Jigar Patel is a citizen of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with his
`
`primary residence being located at 1316 Cheltenham Drive, Bensalem, Pennsylvania 19020.
`
`9.
`
`Defendant Sima Patel is a citizen of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, with his
`
`primary residence being located at 1316 Cheltenham Drive, Bensalem, Pennsylvania 19020.
`
`
`
`10.
`
`Defendant Christine Crager is a citizen of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
`
`residing at 3517 Oakmont Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19020.
`
` 11.
`
`Smart Choice Pharmacy (“Smart Choice”) is, based on information and belief, a
`
`Pennsylvania limited liability company, with its principal office being located at 1941 Street Road
`
`Bensalem Pennsylvania 19020.
`
`Jurisdiction and Venue
`
`
`
`12.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331 as the
`
`claims arise, in part, under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. §1030. This Court has
`
`jurisdiction over the common law counts predicated upon the doctrine of ancillary jurisdiction as
`
`they arise out of the same nucleus of operative facts upon which the federal claims are based.
`
`
`
`13.
`
`Venue is appropriate in this judicial district as the actions, omissions, events, and
`
`transactions giving rise to the claims asserted herein transpired in this judicial district and all
`
`Defendants have engaged in business within this district.
`
`Statement of Material Facts
`
`A.
`
`Employment History, Agreements, and Confidential Information
`
`
`
`14.
`
`Jigar is a licensed pharmacist under the laws of the Commonwealth of
`
`Pennsylvania.
`
`15.
`
`Jigar earned his doctorate in pharmacy from the University of Sciences located in
`
`Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Prior to his being employed by the Plaintiff, Jigar had worked at Saint
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-01339 Document 1 Filed 03/19/21 Page 5 of 38
`
`Agnes Medical Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and Walgreens Pharmacy in Palm Harbor,
`
`Florida.
`
`16.
`
`As a consequence, at the time that he joined the Plaintiff's pharmacy, Jigar had no
`
`independent local pharmacy experience.
`
`17.
`
`Jigar joined the Plaintiff's business on or about August 7, 2010, as a lead
`
`pharmacist. To protect the Plaintiff’s interest in its business and confidential information, Jigar
`
`was obligated to execute a Confidentiality Agreement and Employee Handbook. See Exhibits C
`
`& D.
`
`18.
`
`Commensurate with his employment, Jigar Patel executed a Confidentiality
`
`Agreement. This agreement provided as follows:
`
`The undersigned, as a current or proposed employee of Bensalem Pharmacy
`or an affiliate company, in consideration of employment and/or continued
`employment, does hereby agree that he/she has or will have access to
`patient information and records together with other information and
`documentation which would not be made available to the public or any
`other person or entities; and further agrees not to disclose or to divulge
`information whatsoever regarding patients, patient information, records,
`referring sources, physicians, or other information or documentation
`regarding the corporation or its patients or customers.
`
`See Exhibit C.
`
`
`
`19.
`
`Jigar further acknowledged that a breach of this confidentiality agreement would
`
`entitle the Plaintiff to initiate a suit for both damages and/or injunctive relief. See Exhibit C.
`
`
`
`20.
`
`In addition to the Confidentiality Agreement, Jigar received and acknowledged an
`
`Employee Handbook, which set forth the professional standards governing employee conduct. See
`
`Exhibit D.
`
`
`
`
`
`21.
`
`Among the standards Jigar agreed to adhere to were the following:
`
` No employee will knowingly engage in deceptive, misleading, or
`fraudulent acts.
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-01339 Document 1 Filed 03/19/21 Page 6 of 38
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` All employees will follow company policies and procedures that
`relate to their position.
`
` All patient information shall remain confidential.
`
` Patient information will not be released without the patient's
`knowledge and written permission.
`
` All information given to potential clients will be truthful, factual,
`and informative.
`
`
`22.
`
`
`
`The Employee Handbook provided to Jigar further set forth explicit confidentiality
`
`provisions and detailed the conflicts of interest prohibited by the Plaintiff. See Exhibit D.
`
`
`
`23.
`
`Among the prohibited acts contained in the Employee Handbook were the
`
`requirements that employees not engage in:
`
` Stealing, misusing, destroying, or removing from company
`premises without authorization any company property.
`
` Using the company's facilities, equipment, time, or materials
`without authorization.
`
` Violating any company rule, policy, or procedure.
`
` Engaging in dishonest conduct.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`See Exhibit D.
`
`
`
`24. Moreover, the Employee Handbook expressly provided that proprietary and
`
`confidential information could not be disclosed or used for any other purposes except as otherwise
`
`required by an employee's job position—in this case, that being Jigar's position as a pharmacist in
`
`charge. See Exhibit D.
`
`
`
`25.
`
`Among the prohibitions contained in the Employee Handbook, computers were to
`
`be used only in connection with Jigar’s employment, and only honest, legitimate means were to
`
`be used to collect information concerning patients, customers, or individuals. See Exhibit D.
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-01339 Document 1 Filed 03/19/21 Page 7 of 38
`
`
`
`26.
`
`The Employee Handbook further provided that in managing the business operations
`
`certain staff members, including Jigar, would become privy to sensitive information about the
`
`business, "our customers" and "our employees." This information was required to be maintained
`
`confidential both internally (within the company) and externally (outside the company). Such
`
`confidential information was not, in fact, to be discussed beyond what was required by the
`
`Defendant's given job performance without express specific authority. See Exhibit D pp. 12-16.
`
`
`
`27.
`
`Employees of the Plaintiff, including Jigar, were further required to ensure and to
`
`provide for the security of all protected health information as required by the Health Insurance
`
`Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, 42 U.S.C. § 1320d - 1320d-8 (“HIPAA”). See Exhibit
`
`D, p. 15.
`
`
`
`28.
`
`Pursuant to the Employee Handbook, Jigar was expressly prohibited from engaging
`
`in a “conflict of interest”. A “conflict of interest” in the Employee Handbook was defined to mean
`
`those activities that might create a conflict with the business interests and purposes of the Plaintiff;
`
`or which could have a negative impact on the business or reputation of the company, its products,
`
`or other company employees. See Exhibit D, p. 16.
`
`
`
`29.
`
`Finally, the Employee Handbook detailed the Plaintiff’s computer policy and
`
`electronic communication policy. The Employee Handbook expressly provided that:
`
`Electronic equipment, including, but not limited to, computers, telephones,
`pagers, printers, and fax machines used or owned by the company, and all
`information stored on this equipment is company property. The company
`reserves the right to review and disclose any information sent, received, or
`stored on this equipment.
`
`Much of the information stored in the company's electronic equipment is
`confidential. Disclosure could be made only at the Company's discretion.
`Any unauthorized disclosure to outsiders or customers is prohibited.
`
`The Company's computers, computer files, the email systems, internet
`access, and the software furnished to employees are Company property and
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-01339 Document 1 Filed 03/19/21 Page 8 of 38
`
`are used for Company purposes only and not for personal use to
`communicate with friends or family or to access the internet for personal
`purposes. You may use the company's electronic equipment only for
`business-related purposes.
`
`Consistent therewith, the Employee Handbook provided that "an employee should
`
`
`
`30.
`
`not use a password, access a file, or retrieve a stored communication that is not normally accessible
`
`to that employee."
`
`
`
`
`
`31.
`
`In or about 2011, Crager was employed as a pharmacy technician by the Plaintiff.
`
`32.
`
`Her duties included, but were not limited to:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`receiving and filling prescription requests for patients,
`
`counting, procuring, measuring, and weighing tablets and medications
`
`mixing medications,
`
`selecting the proper prescription container,
`
`creating prescription labels,
`
`preparing computer forms,
`
`maintaining accurate patient files,
`
`completing cash and register transactions,
`
`answering the phone and retrieving messages,
`
`taking inventory and stock of medications,
`
`
`
`and performing such other obligations as may be assigned to her by the
`pharmacist.
`
`Crager was the primary pharmacy technician on-site at the pharmacy during the
`
`
`
`33.
`
`time frame 2011 until her resignation in 2020.
`
`
`
`34.
`
`Crager executed the exact same Confidentiality Agreement and agreed to the terms
`
`of the same Employee Handbook as Jigar Patel. See Exhibits E & F.
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-01339 Document 1 Filed 03/19/21 Page 9 of 38
`
`B.
`
`The Negotiations to Purchase the Pharmacy
`
`
`
`35.
`
`Beginning in 2018, Plaintiff and Jigar began to negotiate the terms of a sale
`
`whereby the defendant would acquire the Plaintiff's business assets as set forth in the attached
`
`Exhibit A & B annexed hereto.
`
`
`
`36.
`
`Over the course of the next ten months, the parties engaged in substantial
`
`discussions regarding the terms of the purchase and sale and revised the agreement as reflected in
`
`Exhibits A & B.
`
`
`
`37.
`
`Pursuant to the attached Memorandum of Understanding, Jigar agreed to purchase
`
`the assets set forth therein, including, but not limited to, the inventory, customer records, files,
`
`fixtures and equipment, and licenses and permits.
`
`
`
`38.
`
`The Memorandum of Understanding was a byproduct of extensive negotiations
`
`between Jigar and the Plaintiff's principal, Kaushal Patel (“Kaushal”).
`
`
`
`39. Months went by as the parties continued their negotiations whereby Jigar would
`
`acquire Plaintiff’s assets.
`
`
`
`40.
`
`Suddenly, however, on May 8th, 2020, Jigar provided Kaushal two weeks' notice
`
`of his intention to terminate.
`
`
`
`41.
`
`Only then did Jigar inform the Plaintiff that he and his wife Sima were opening a
`
`pharmacy only a few blocks down the street, in direct competition with the Plaintiff’s operation.
`
` 42.
`
`Unbeknownst to the Plaintiff, Jigar Patel, and Crager had already downloaded from
`
`Plaintiff’s computer equipment client and customer date-including their names and phone
`
`numbers; contacted customers had them execute authorizations to transfer their medical records
`
`and prescription needs to this new “pharmacy” and solicited Plaintiff’s employees to join them.
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-01339 Document 1 Filed 03/19/21 Page 10 of 38
`
`
`
`43.
`
`In fact, a forensic analysis of Plaintiff’s computer system has established that Jigar
`
`accessed Plaintiff's confidential software and data. Jigar then downloaded, onto a USB drive,
`
`Plaintiff's confidential customer information and prescription information.
`
`
`
`44.
`
`Almost immediately after Jigar provided his resignation, Crager, likewise, resigned
`
`by "text."
`
`
`
`45.
`
`Based, in part on their theft, within four days, Jigar and his wife Sima opened their
`
`pharmacy and immediately began to demand the Plaintiff transfer various customer records to their
`
`attention as they had already procured customer consents.
`
`
`
`46.
`
`As a result of their theft of Plaintiff’s confidential and trade secret information,
`
`Defendants were able to directly solicit Plaintiff’s customers. In less than 6 weeks, Plaintiff
`
`received notifications from almost 70 percent of their customers requesting that their pharmacy
`
`records and business be transferred to Smart Choice Pharmacy.
`
`
`
`47.
`
`Defendants conspired to utilize Plaintiff's computer system and exceeded their
`
`authority to obtain confidential information therefrom, including but not limited to, customer
`
`names and information to recruit them to leave the Plaintiff's business.
`
`
`
`48.
`
`By engaging in such illegal and improper action, the Defendants misappropriated
`
`for their use, valuable assets, and confidential trade information and data the Plaintiff had
`
`developed over 10 years. The damages arising from the abuse of Plaintiff’s computers have
`
`resulted in more than $5,000 in damages.
`
`
`
`49.
`
`In fact, the Plaintiff invested substantial sums in its business assets and developed
`
`a strong and loyal customer base as a result.
`
`
`
`50.
`
`Plaintiff accomplished its business goal by expending approximately $90,000 for
`
`fit-out and improved the facilities, and considerable sums for employee salaries, purchasing
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-01339 Document 1 Filed 03/19/21 Page 11 of 38
`
`computer systems, and licensed software programs in connection with the operation of the
`
`pharmacy.
`
`
`
`51.
`
`In expending such sums, the Plaintiff further developed a confidential list of
`
`customers. This customer list was the Plaintiff’s property as Jigar and Crager both acknowledged
`
`in writing.
`
`
`
`52.
`
`Access was further limited to only a few employees as the Plaintiff’s computer
`
`system was password protected.
`
`
`
`
`
`53.
`
`These individuals could only obtain such data if they had the necessary passwords.
`
`54.
`
`Each such employee, and in particular Jigar and Crager, were further subject to the
`
`terms and conditions of a Confidentiality Agreement and Employee Handbook.
`
`
`
`55.
`
`In order to undermine the Plaintiffs operation Jigar Patel, Sima Patel, and Christine
`
`Crager:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(i) Orchestrated a plan to mislead Kaushal Patel into believing Jigar Patel
`was interested in buying the Pharmacy, when in fact they were plotting to
`open a competitive operation, using Plaintiff’s confidential and trade secret
`information as the backbone of their business.
`
`(ii) Downloading and using Plaintiff’s confidential information by violating
`or interfering with the terms of the KBS Pharmacy Employee Handbook
`and Confidentiality Agreements.
`
`(iii) Contacting Plaintiff’s customers and recruiting them to leave the
`Plaintiff’s business.
`
`(iv) Recruiting Plaintiff’s employees, in particular Firdosh Patel, and
`providing him access to Plaintiff’s confidential information.
`
`(v) Illegally used confidential customers' information to solicit them to
`leave the Plaintiff’s pharmacy and to procure their signature on documents
`needed to authorize the transfer of their medical records to Smart Choice
`pharmacy.
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-01339 Document 1 Filed 03/19/21 Page 12 of 38
`
`
`
`56.
`
`In fact, when Kaushal Patel observed in 2019 and early 2020 that Jigar was tending
`
`to stay late at the office and was going in on weekends after hours Jigar responded that he was
`
`fulfilling certain work obligations.
`
`
`
`57.
`
`The truth is that Jigar, his wife Sima, and Crager were undertaking an effort to
`
`obtain copies of all relevant and confidential information maintained by the Plaintiff.
`
`58.
`
`Based on their misrepresentation and fraud, the Defendants were surreptitiously
`
`able to obtain confidential information off the Plaintiff's computer system and to remove assets for
`
`their benefit and the operation and management of Smart Choice Pharmacy.
`
`59.
`
`Sima, the alleged “owner” of Smart Choice Pharmacy, at all relevant times,
`
`facilitated and encouraged her husband's efforts, and therefore, interfered with the Plaintiff's
`
`contracts with both Jigar and Crager.
`
`60.
`
`Sima’s interference of the Plaintiff's business included, but was not limited to, her
`
`deliberate interference with the Plaintiff’s Confidentiality Agreements, Employee Handbook,
`
`employee fiduciary obligations, and customer relations and contractual understandings.
`
`61.
`
`At all relevant times, Sima acted recklessly and intentionally to damage and
`
`interfere with the foregoing to the detriment of the Plaintiff.
`
`62.
`
`As detailed above, the Defendants’ deliberately and intentionally interfered with
`
`the Plaintiff's customer relationships, misappropriating Plaintiff’s confidential trade secret
`
`information for their own benefit and abusing and exceeding their authority in obtaining
`
`information pertinent to the patients and customers from Plaintiff’s computers.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-01339 Document 1 Filed 03/19/21 Page 13 of 38
`
`Count I
`Computer Fraud and Abuse
`(Defendants)
`
`Plaintiff repeats the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 68 as if set forth herein at
`
`
`63.
`
`length.
`
`64.
`
`The statutory provisions of the Consumer Fraud and Abuse Act (the “CFAA”) are
`
`set forth at 18 U.S.C. §1030. It provides in pertinent part:
`
`
`
`a.
`
`Whoever --
`
`Intentionally accesses a computer without authorization or
`(2)
`exceeds authorized access, and thereby obtains:
`
`
`… (C) information from any protected computer if the
`conduct
`involved an interstate or foreign communication;
`
`
`
`(4) knowingly and with intent to defraud access of protected
`computer without authorization, or exceeds authorized access, and by
`means of such conduct furthers the intended fraud and obtains anything of
`value, unless the object of the fraud and the thing obtained consist only of
`the use of the computer and value of such is not more than $5,000 in any
`one year.
`
`is liable for damages.
`
`The term “protected computer” under the CFAA, means a computer, inter alia,
`
`
`
`
`65.
`
`which is used in interstate or foreign commerce or communication, including a computer located
`
`outside the United States that is used in a manner that affects interstate or foreign commerce or
`
`communication with the United States. 18 U.S.C. §1030(e)(2).
`
`66.
`
`The term “damage” under the CFAA means any impairment to the integrity of
`
`availability of data, a program, a system, or information in excess of $5,000. 18 U.S.C.
`
`§1030(e)(8).
`
`67.
`
`The Defendants, over the course of several months, intentionally accessed
`
`Plaintiff’s computer systems without authorization or in excess of their authorization to obtain
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-01339 Document 1 Filed 03/19/21 Page 14 of 38
`
`and/or destroy confidential and trade secret information of Plaintiff. In particular, Jigar and Crager
`
`obtained Plaintiff's customer and prescription information in excess of their authority.
`
`68.
`
`The Defendants accessed such information in order to specifically harm and
`
`damage Plaintiff’s ongoing business operations. The Plaintiff sustained damages in excess of
`
`$5,000 by conducting an extensive forensic examination; hiring consultants and experts to conduct
`
`such investigation in order to determine the nature and extent of the breach and damages arising
`
`therefrom, efforts to preserve the network, employee time to facilitate the foregoing; and
`
`identifying the perpetrator.
`
`69.
`
`The actions of the Defendants have constituted a violation of the CFAA and caused
`
`Plaintiff substantial economic damages, including but not limited to lost profits and goodwill.
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court enter judgment in its
`
`favor against the Defendants, individually and severally, as follows:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`for damages sustained by Plaintiff;
`
`for punitive damages;
`
`for attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of suit;
`
`such other relief as the Court deems just and proper including, but
`not limited to, temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunctive
`relief.
`
`
`
`70.
`
`length.
`
`Count II
`Breach of Fiduciary Duty
`(Jigar & Crager)
`
`Plaintiff repeats the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 69 as if set forth herein at
`
`71.
`
`Under Pennsylvania's common law, an employee owes a duty to act with the utmost
`
`good faith, loyalty, and diligence in the furtherance and advancement of the employer’s
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-01339 Document 1 Filed 03/19/21 Page 15 of 38
`
`interests. Sylvester v. Beck, 406 Pa. 607, 178 A.2d 755 (1962). The duty of loyalty includes an
`
`employee’s duty not to do anything while employed that is intended to further the interest of
`
`another company that competes with his/her current employer. This duty exists whether or not
`
`you have a non-compete agreement. Pennsylvania's Supreme Court cited to Matthew 6:24 for the
`
`proposition that “no man can serve two masters,” and certainly not where the interests of those
`
`masters conflict. Onorato v. Wissahickon Park, Inc., 430 Pa. 416, 244 A.2d 22 (1968).
`
`72.
`
`An employee is an agent of his/her employer, and an agent is a fiduciary with
`
`respect to matters within the scope of the agency and is required to act solely for the benefit of
`
`his/her principal in all matters implicating same. SHV Coal, Inc. v. ContinentalGrain Co., 376 Pa.
`
`Super. 241, 545 A.2d 917 (1988).
`
`73.
`
`An employee may not use his/her employer’s confidential information collected
`
`surreptitiously during employment without the knowledge or consent of the employer, and doing
`
`so violates an employee’s fiduciary duties to his/her employer. Morgan’s Home Equipment Corp.
`
`v.Martucci, 390 Pa. 618, 136 A.2d 838 (1958).
`
`74.
`
`Employees who covertly intend to terminate their employment may not solicit
`
`customers for a rival business before doing so, nor may they do other similar acts in direct
`
`competition with the employer’s business. Colonell v. Goodman, 78 F.Supp. 845 (1948).
`
`75.
`
` Employees owe their employers certain obligations and duties. Among the
`
`obligations an employee owes an employer is to:
`
` Acting in the company’s best interests.
`
` Not competing with his or her employer:
`
` Not to divert business to a competitor:
`
` Protecting the company’s confidential and proprietary information.
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-01339 Document 1 Filed 03/19/21 Page 16 of 38
`
`76.
`
`Jigar and Crager, each owed a duty of loyalty to Plaintiff and were bound to act as
`
`fiduciaries for the benefit of Plaintiff with respect to all matters within the scope of their
`
`employment.
`
`77.
`
`Upon information and belief, Jigar and Crager breached the duty of loyalty by
`
`among other things (i) engaging in activities that were detrimental to the interest of Plaintiff (ii)
`
`engaging in competitive business activities; (iii) accepting wages and benefits while acting
`
`contrary to Plaintiff ’ interest (iv) using and misappropriating Plaintiff’s property, resources, trade
`
`secrets, proprietary information for their own personal benefit; (v) soliciting Plaintiff ’ business
`
`and customers by misappropriating Plaintiff’s confidential information, (vi) acting in conflict to
`
`their duties to the Plaintiff by serving the interests of Smart Choice Pharmacy; (vii) diverting
`
`Plaintiff ’ business and customers which they were paid to retain, develop and protect, (viii)
`
`funneling business to Smart Choice Pharmacy and (ix) engaging in other activities detrimental and
`
`contrary to Plaintiff ’ interests.
`
`78.
`
`As a result of Jigar and Crager's activities, Plaintiff has suffered considerable
`
`damages, including lost business, lost customers, lost profits, damaged customers and vendors’
`
`relationships.
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter judgment in
`
`its favor and against Jigar and Crager, individually, jointly, and severally as follows:
`
`for damages;
`
`
`for punitive damages;
`
`for attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of suit;
`
`for such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-01339 Document 1 Filed 03/19/21 Page 17 of 38
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Count III
`Breach of the Duty of Good Faith
`(Jigar & Crager)
`
`Plaintiff repeats the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 80 as if set forth herein at
`
`
`
`79.
`
`length.
`
`80.
`
`Under Pennsylvania's common law (i.e. the law developed over hundreds of years
`
`through court decisions) an employee owes a duty to act with the utmost good faith in the
`
`furtherance and advancement of the employer’s interests. Sylvester v. Beck, 406 Pa. 607, 178 A.2d
`
`755 (1962).
`
`81.
`
`The employee defendants, Jigar and Crager, each owed a duty good faith to Plaintiff
`
`and were bound to act as fiduciaries for the benefit of Plaintiff with respect to all matters within
`
`the scope of their employment.
`
`82.
`
`Upon information and belief, and as detailed above, Jigar and Crager, as employees
`
`of the Plaintiff, have breached the duty of good faith by among other things, by (i) engaging in
`
`activities that were detrimental to the interests of Plaintiff (ii) engaging in competitive business
`
`activities; (iii) accepting wages and benefits while acting contrary to Plaintiff ’ interest (iv) using
`
`and misappropriating Plaintiff’s property, resources, trade secrets, proprietary information for their
`
`own personal benefit; (v) soliciting Plaintiff ’ business and customers by misappropriating
`
`Plaintiff’s confidential information, (vi) acting in conflict to their duties to the Plaintiff by serving
`
`the interests of Smart Choice Pharmacy; (vii) diverting Plaintiff ’ business and customers which
`
`they were paid to retain, develop and protect, (viii) funneling business to Smart Choice Pharmacy
`
`and (ix) engaging in other activities detrimental and contrary to Plaintiff ’ interests.
`
`
`
`17
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-01339 Document 1 Filed 03/19/21 Page 18 of 38
`
`83.
`
`As a result of the Employee Defendants’ activities, Plaintiff has suffered
`
`considerable damages, including lost business, lost customers, lost profits, damaged customer and
`
`vendor relationships.
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter judgment in
`
`its favor and against the Employee Defendants, individually, jointly, and severally as follows:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`
`for damages;
`
`
`for punitive damages;
`
`for attorney’s fees, interest, and costs of suit;
`
`for such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.
`
`Count IV
`Breach of Contract
`(Jigar & Crager)
`
`
`84.
`
`length.
`
`Plaintiff repeats the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 83 as if set forth herein at
`
`85.
`
`Defendants Jigar and Crager each agreed to the terms of a Confidentiality
`
`Agreement and Employee Handbook which set forth, in part the terms and conditions of their
`
`employment.
`
`86.
`
`Commensurate with their employment, each Defendant executed a Confidentiality
`
`Agreement. This agreement provided as follows:
`
`The undersigned, as a current or proposed employee of Bensalem Pharmacy
`or an affiliate company, in consideration of employment and/or continued
`employment, does hereby agree that he/she has or will have access to
`patient information and records together with other information and
`documentation which would not be made available to the public or any
`other person or entities; and further agrees not to disclose or to divulge
`information whatsoever regarding patients, patient information, records,
`referring sources, physicians, or other information or documentation
`regarding the corporation or its patients or customers.
`
`
`
`18
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-01339 Document 1 Filed 03/19/21 Page 19 of 38
`
`
`See Exhibit C.
`
`
`
`87.
`
`Both Jigar and Crager further acknowledged that a breach of this confidentiality
`
`agreement would entitle the Plaintiff to initiate a suit for both damages and/or injunctive relief.
`
`See Exhibit A.
`
`
`
`88.
`
`In addition to the Confidentiality Agreement, Jigar and Crager received and
`
`acknowledged an Employee Handbook, which set forth the professional standards governing
`
`employee conduct. See Exhibit D.
`
`
`
`89.
`
`Among the standards Jigar and Crager agreed to adhere to were the following:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` No employee will knowingly engage in deceptive, misleading, or
`f

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket