IP Law Daily, TRADE SECRETS—La. App.: Scope of injunction affirmed in oil company competition dispute, (Jan 30, 2026)

By Kevin M. Finson, J.D.

Denying a noncompete provision requested by the plaintiff was not error because the trial court could have reasonably found that the parties were not direct competitors to begin with.

An oil company was not entitled to an injunction imposing noncompete conditions on another company that was alleged to have misappropriated its trade secrets, the Louisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal has held. The trial court’s determination that an injunction requiring the return and nonuse of certain information was sufficient to maintain the status quo was not shown to be manifestly erroneous (John W. Stone Oil Distributor, L.L.C. v. Sunoco LP, No. 25-CA-387 (La. App. Jan. 28, 2026)).

John W. Stone Oil Distributor, LLC (Stone) was a family-run Louisiana company in the business of supplying fuel, potable water, and lubricants to vessels on the lower Mississippi river. Stone sued Sunoco LP (Sunoco) and Stone’s former employee Anthony Odak, alleging that they conspired to steal Stone’s data for unfair competition and business destruction. Stone alleged that Sunoco made overtures to purchase Stone from its owners, and that Odak, who had been employed by Stone, maintained communication with Sunoco and was later hired by Sunoco, and had supplied Stone’s confidential and proprietary business information to Sunoco. The trial court entered a preliminary injunction requiring that Sunoco and Odak return certain information and prohibiting them from using that data. The trial court rejected Stone’s request for a broader injunction which would have imposed a non-compete requirement on Sunoco and Odak. Stone appealed, arguing that the trial court by rejecting the broader injunction.

The court explained that the purpose of an injunction is to preserve the status quo, and that the determination of what scope of order is necessary to do that is a question of fact reviewed under the manifest error standard. The court noted that there was testimony in the record from which the trial judge could have found that the parties were not direct competitors with respect to the products and geographic regions at issue. There was no manifest error in the trial court’s determination of what orders were necessary to preserve the status quo.

The case is No. 25-CA-387.

Judge: Gravois, J.

Attorneys: Robert R. Johnston (Hollingsworth LLP) for John W. Stone Oil Distributor, L.L.C. James K. Ordeneaux (Plauche Maselli Parkerson LLP) for Sunoco LP.

Companies: John W. Stone Oil Distributor, L.L.C.; Sunoco LP

Cases: TradeSecrets LouisianaNews