conduct by the defendant, although motivated by something other than ill will
toward any particular party, is so outrageous that malice toward a person
injured as a result of that conduct can be implied.? Id. Implied malice cannot
be found based merely on ?reckless disregard of the circumstances.? Id. There
is no inconsistency between recovery of disgorgement and recovery of punitive
damages: ?If the defendant?s conduct meets the applicable standard for
additional liability, there is no intrinsic inconsistency in a judgment that
reinforces disgorgement of wrongful gain with an explicitly punitive award.?
Restatement (Third) of Restitution 51, cmt. k.

The evidence shows Kevin acted with malice. He told Attorney Bell he
would not provide Emile with information about the TCRG sale because he felt
he was working a lot harder than Emile. (Tr. 11/23-24) His testimony and
demeanor on the stand betrayed the same attitude. (Tr. 29). It is, of
course, not true. He complained about Emile not being in the office, but the
evidence showed Emile was out of the of?ce in support of new ventures the

Homewood Park subdivision (which Kevio? kid he?s never been to (Tr. 235))



and their new lab company. It also had been spending winters?~-



about 4 months out of every year Wiogst. And while Kevin

   
   
    
      

complains he was busy chasing . ?tomers in an

effort to hit Spark?s milestone. work, for reasons
that were apparent to Ke Lilac effort, and Emile was

actively chasing large 392:5;qu - {(1757-58) The Court can