A-Line TDS, Inc. v. Frank Martuscelli

── A-Line TDS, Inc. v. Frank Martuscelli ── Court: Court of Appeals of Iowa Date: April 15, 2026 Category: General IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA _______________ No. 25-1077 Filed April 15, 2026 _______________ A-Line TDS, Inc., Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Frank Martuscelli, Defendant–Appellee. _______________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, The Honorable Andrea J. Dryer, Judge. _______________ AFFIRMED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS _______________ Brandon M. Schwartz and Michael D. Schwartz of Schwartz Law Firm, Oakdale, Minnesota, attorneys for appellant. Adam J. Babinat and Luke M. Zahari of Redfern, Mason, Larsen & Moore, P.L.C., Cedar Falls, attorneys for appellee. _______________ Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Sandy, J. 1 SANDY, Judge. A-Line TDS, Inc. (A-Line) appeals the district court’s order granting Frank Martuscelli’s motion for summary judgment. A-Line argues the district court abused its discretion by ruling on Martuscelli’s summary judgment motion before it ruled on A-Line’s motion to compel, and erred in granting summary judgment for Martuscelli. We affirm, determining the district court did not abuse its discretion or commit any error of law. We award Martuscelli his reasonable attorney fees and remand for the district court’s determination of appropriate appellate attorney fees. BACKGROUND FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS Martuscelli signed a non-compete agreement with his employer, A-Line, in May 2015. Before that, Martuscelli worked for Transformer Disposal Specialists, Inc., a company which A-Line later purchased. The non-compete agreement with A-Line limited Martuscelli’s ability to compete with A-Line during his employment and for a period thereafter due to Martuscelli’s technical expertise in “the business of providing decommissioning and buying, collecting, processing, recycling and selling scrap metal, oil, and oil filled electrical equipment, and in the business of removal of all equipment and structures associated therewith, and in the business of selling surplus assets.” Under the non-compete agreement and relevant to this suit, Martuscelli agreed he would not “engage in the business of, or be employed by, or perform services for, any firm . . . similar to [A-Line]” for a period of three years after the end of his employment at A-Line. Under a non- inducement covenant, he also agreed not to “induce, either directly or indirectly, any employee, agent, independent contractor, supplier, customer or any other person or organization to terminate or alter its relationship with 2 A-Line” during that same period. Lastly, the non-disclosure covenant provided that Martuscelli would not “directly, or indirectly, use for [Martuscelli] or use for, or disclose to, any party other than A-Line, any secrets or confidential information or data regarding the business of A-Line” at any time during or after his employment with A-Line. In furtherance of that non-disclosure provision, Martuscelli agreed that he would deliver to A-Line all property belonging to A-Line, including but not limited to all memoranda, notes, records, plans, or other documents made or compiled by, delivered to, or otherwise acquired by, [Martuscelli], concerning costs, uses, methods, designs, applications, or purchasers of products sold by or brokered by A-Line or any confidential products, process, system, or method used, developed, acquired or investigated by A-Line. Martuscelli’s employm