MEMORANDUM
TO:
Cheryl Olsen, Legal Counsel for Greene’s Jewelry
FROM:
Kyle Hulce
SUBJECT:
Jennifer Lawson – Confidentiality Violation and Alleged Wrongful Termination
DATE:
September 26, 2018
CC:
Lisa Peele, Head of Human Resources
I. Memo Introduction:
Greene’s Jewelry separated Jennifer Lawson, consistent and compliant with legislation related to protected classes under Title VII-PDA, FMLA, and ADA. Greene’s Jewelry was not acting in a discriminatory manner or giving any one individual preferential treatment, as all junior executive secretary positions were eliminated. Jennifer Lawson willfully delivered intellectual property to Howell’s Jewelry in exchange for employment and therefore violated the terms of her confidentiality agreement.
…show more content…
Ordinarily, executives for Greene’s Jewelry sign both a non-compete covenant and a confidentiality agreement. Ms. Lawson was only required to sign the confidentiality agreement. The agreement states that she agreed, “never to disclose any information that she might acquire from Greene's regarding the process used to create Ever-Gold.” After her separation from Greene’s Jewelry, she sought employment with Howell’s Jewelry and offered her knowledge of the Ever-Gold process. This is evidenced by the fact that they have a created a process nearly identical to that which is used to manufacture Ever-Gold. She willfully offered information that is considered trade secret and not that which is obtained from her experience working as a junior executive secretary for our …show more content…
Lawson was not bound by the non-compete covenant, she was bound by a confidentiality agreement which precluded her from sharing that information with another entity. In Captain & Co. v. Towne, (Kline & Floyd) the plaintiff had employed the defendant on a contract basis, requiring him to sign both a non-compete and a confidentiality agreement. The Plaintiff employed Towne in insurance cleanup and restoration work. Towne sought employment with a competing company that performed the same type of work. The Plaintiff pursued an injunction to prevent Towne from using alleged trade secrets, such as how they acquired clients, to lure customers away by intentionally underbidding for jobs. However, the court contended, clarifying the fact that the defendant’s new employer handled work with individuals that had insurance and those that did not. Furthermore, the court specified that the defendant was simply using residual knowledge and experience and nothing further. (Kline & Floyd) For that reason, the court did not find in favor of the plaintiff. Ms. Lawson, however; transferred the delineated process for Ever-Gold to a competitor. Since Ms. Lawson was not a jeweler, she would not have learned the process in the normal course of her employment. Based on this case precedent, the court may find that Ms. Lawson most certainly misappropriated trade
Level 1: Literal In the Wonders of the World by Cotton Mather, Martha Carrier is accused of being a witch and was “...indicted for the bewitching certain persons, according to the form usual in such cases, pleading not guilty to her indictment”. During her trial, many people were called as witnesses to testify against her. Even her children went as far to say that “they were witches themselves, but that their mother had made them so”. Though her children’s statement was not used against her, there was already enough sufficient statements that were claimed to be true “evidence” against the case of Martha Carrier.
The Duke lacrosse case implicated criminal actions of: first degree rape, first degree sex offenses’ and kidnapping charges against three Duke University lacrosse players; Collin Finnerty, Reade Seligman and Dean Evans (North Carolina State Bar v. Nifong, 2007,p.18-20). According to Mosteller (2007) the case started with “gang rape allegations” by Crystal Mangum, a black exotic dancer who was also a student at North Carolina Central University on the morning of March 14th, 2006 (p.1337). The alleged rape occurred during the Duke lacrosse teams’ party at 610 North Buchanan Blvd (North Carolina State Bar v. Nifong, 2007,p.1). Suspiciously Mangum could not make any identifications of her attackers even after viewing most Duke lacrosse team members including the names mentioned above and the lacrosse team members who actually lived at 610 North Buchanan Blvd (Mosteller, 2007, p.1407). Mosteller (2007) also mentions that Mike Nifong had to know that
I started to explain to Tina the Burns verses Kelly. I told her the idea behinds Burns was that the future benefit to the carrier was speculative then the claimant has to prove it as he goes along and the only cases that are not
Summary of Facts Federal Trade Commission v. Phoebe Putney Background. In an attempt to increase access to affordable care, the Hospital Authority Law, in Georgia (GA), states that “hospital authorities” can be developed to provide healthcare services in multiple counties. These hospital authorities can acquire, purchase, and lease multiple healthcare facilities. However, all actions of the hospital authority must benefit the community it serves. Phoebe Putney Memorial Hospital is owned by the Hospital Authority of Albany-Dougherty County (Authority).
1. Name of the Case: Williamson v. City of Houston 2. Citation: 148 F.3d 462 3. Date Decided: 1998 4. Facts: Linda Williamson was a police officer with the City of Houston and was assigned to the Organized Crime Squad and was frequently partnered with Officer Doug McLeod.
The Ms. Silvera v. Olympia Jewelry Corporation case is an employment law case. Michelle Silvera was not treated right by her boss, Morris Olympia. Her working environment was not safe due Morris's inappropriate comments and sexual assaults. Under the Human Rights Code, everyone had the right to a safe working environment. It states that the employer should provide a safe environment for his/her workers, which clearly Morris did not do.
The employees were sanctioned for the underlying charges and the charge of giving the false statements. Holding of the Court: The court ruled in favor of La Chance because agencies
She disclosed that the trade and exchange was between their headquarters, and Juarez, Mexico. They needed a location where it was more cost effective to transport their product instead of sending it to their headquarters each time, the product delivery was fast and gave them the advantage to produce more labor and products to distribute. It was really important for the company to be close to a border city because of cheap labor. They had Mexicans come to work in the United States for lower paying jobs. She has been a part of the company for eight years, working over twelve hours a day, constant back problems and standing for long periods of time.
Along with the list they also disclosed documents in its possession respecting that client. Despite their willingness the provide proof of their just cause, this resulted in proving that CIBC Wood Gundy did not anticipate proving isolated incidents of unauthorized trading. The motion for particulars was eventually dismissed, except for the fact that Mr. Saturley was authorized to produce the correspondence at trial as particulars of the CIBC Wood Gundy defense. The same subject is now brought forward under the Rules for discovery and disclosure. Ms. Wilma Ditchfield is a senior official of CIBC Wood Gundy, she was closely involved in the events leading up to Mr. Saturley's dismissal, and she is the person designated under the Rules to manage disclosure by the defendant in this suit.
The appellant essential accommodation claim went to trial but court excluded evidence regarding to disability. The plaintiff’s is not estopped by her SSDI and long term disability claims. However the issue should have been decided by jury. The court foreclosed to grant the plaintiff was not a qualified individual.
In the case of Young v. UPS, Young presented facts to further prove UPS policies accommodate employees who were injured on the job, loss of Department of Transportation (DOT) certifications or disabilities covered by ADA. Young continued her argument by providing past incidents showing UPS has accommodated employees with work limitations similar to hers. UPS policies show discrimination against pregnant employees because of the lack of light duty assignments for pregnant employees and not non-pregnant employees. UPS argues Young did not fall into the categories of ADA, Department of Transportations or injuries occurred on the job, further explaining their polices of accommodation, drivers who are injured on the job, drivers who has lost their
Problems in Tenure Litigation The case Howard University v. Best, 547 A.2d 144 (D.C. Cir. 1988), is the second appeal arising out the employment contract of appellee Dr. Marie L. Best with appellant Howard University. In Howard University v. Best, 484 A2d 958,990 (D.C. 1884) (Best I), Dr. Best stated claims of indefinite tenure, sex discrimination, and intentional infliction of emotional distress as a result of, not being awarded indefinite tenure but a late notice for a non-renewal of her contract ( Kaplin, W. A., & Lee, B. A. ,2013). In the trial, the verdict was in favor of Dr. Best, holding the University had breached its contract with her by failing to provide timely notice of non-renewal.
Your district must implement a Reduction in Force (RIF) based on declining enrollment and budget cuts. You have recommended a list of teachers from your school to the superintendent. One of the teachers on the list had previously filed an EEOC suit against you alleging discrimination regarding a department chair’s position that she was not awarded. You know that she will allege retaliation as the basis for her layoff.
Th company does not have a obligation to make any gesture of fairness to Ms. Landis. The action that were the ground for her termination is very clear. The way it was done leaves some questions unanswered. The company policy was not followed. The progressive discipline policy was not followed according to the handbook.
In matters of confidentiality, Banking is risky due to the highly sensitive nature of information which is often exchanged, recorded and retained. The purpose of this article is to discuss the clash of confidentiality and disclosure in the banking sector across the globe. The Black’s Law Dictionary defines confidentiality as secrecy or the state of having the dissemination of certain information restricted. Breach of confidentiality, then, refers, to the violation of this trust that has been placed in another in a fiduciary relationship, in this case bank and their customers.