Mathew R. DuSablon, Appellant-Defendant,
Jackson County Bank, Appellee-Plaintiff.
from the Jackson Superior Court The Honorable Bruce A.
MacTavish, Special Judge Trial Court Cause No.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT Jason M. Smith Smith Law Services,
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Debra A. Mastrian Suzannah W. Overholt
Elizabeth S. Traylor SmithAmundsen LLC.
of the Case
In two notices of appeal filed with our Court,  Mathew R. DuSablon stated that he was
appealing the trial court's entry of a preliminary
injunction, the court's subsequent conversion of that
preliminary injunction into a permanent injunction, an order
in which the trial court found DuSablon to be in contempt, a
September 2018 sanctions order, and an October 2018 sanctions
order. DuSablon asserted that Indiana Appellate Rules
14(A)(1) and 14(A)(5) provided that he may appeal each of
those various interlocutory orders as a matter of right.
DuSablon's counter-claims against plaintiff Jackson
County Bank (the "Bank") remain pending in the
DuSablon purports to raise two issues for our review.
However, we conclude that DuSablon has not secured appellate
jurisdiction. There is no final judgment, as his
counter-claims remain pending in the trial court. The
preliminary injunction, which may have supported
interlocutory review as of right under Appellate Rule
14(A)(5), no longer exists. And neither permanent injunctions
nor contempt findings, without more, are bases for appellate
review under Appellate Rule 14(A).
This leaves the two sanctions orders. The October 2018
sanctions order superseded the September 2018 sanctions
order, and we agree with DuSablon that the October order is
appealable as of right under Appellate Rule 14(A)(1) as an
order for the payment of money. However, DuSablon raises no
actual argument on appeal regarding the payment of money
under that order, to say nothing of an argument supported by
cogent reasoning and citations to the record. Accordingly,
there is nothing for this Court to review. We therefore
dismiss this appeal.
and Procedural History
On February 28, 2018, the Bank filed its complaint against
DuSablon on the ground that he was in violation of a
noncompete agreement with the Bank. The Bank sought a
preliminary and permanent injunction. DuSablon moved to
dismiss the Bank's complaint, which the trial court
denied, and filed counterclaims against the Bank.
In August, after a fact-finding hearing on the Bank's
request for a preliminary injunction, the trial court found
Bank] is an Indiana state chartered bank that provides
consumer banking services to customers as well as investment
services . . . .
September 2007, [the Bank] hired DuSablon as an Investment
Representative to provide investment services to [the
September 12, 2007, DuSablon executed the Agreement, which
includes provisions barring DuSablon from disclosing
confidential [Bank] information, requiring the return of
[Bank] property upon his termination, barring competition for
a reasonable period of time within a reasonable geographic
area after termination, and prohibiting him from soliciting
and diverting employees, certain customers, and prospective
customers of [the Bank].
Specifically, the Agreement provides that:
DuSablon covenants and agrees not to enter the employment of,
or perform any advisory or consulting service for, or make a
substantial investment in, any branch, office or satellite of
a financial services business, investment services business,
or a financial institution . . . which branch, office or
satellite is located in any county in which [the Bank] has a
branch or office for a period of twelve (12) months from the
date of termination of employment with [the Bank],
irrespective of who terminated the employment or why it was
(Agreement, Section 1.)
Agreement further provides that:
DuSablon agrees that he will not directly or indirectly at
any time during the Business Protection Period solicit or
induce or attempt to solicit or induce any employee of [the
Bank] to terminate his or her employment, representation or
other association with [the Bank].
(Agreement, Section 2(b).[)] The Agreement defines
"Business Protection Period" as the time DuSablon
was employed by [the Bank] and for a period of twelve (12)
months after such employment ends. (Agreement, Section 2(a).)
Bank] has offices in the following counties (the
"Restricted Area"): Jackson, Lawrence, Jennings,
Monroe and Bartholomew.
DuSablon's responsibilities as an employee of [the Bank]
included pursuing new business on [the Bank's] behalf,
developing investment relationships with current and
prospective customers of [the Bank], and selling insurance
and financial products for [the Bank's] benefit.
accomplish these tasks, DuSablon relied upon direct marketing
and referrals from [the Bank], [the Bank's] ...