Business Law I Case Study
Citation:
Nasc Services, Inc v. Jervis 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40502 (U.S. Dist. Ct. D. N.J. 2008)
Parties: * Plaintiff – Nasc Services and Russell * Defendant – Jervis, Moses, Jones, Barrow, Moffett, and Nee * Appellant – N/A * Appellee– N/A
History:
The plaintiff motioned against the defendants under the notion that they violated a covenant in their employee contracts. If the defendants were to be found guilty then the consequences would be an oppressive and unfair scenario. Therefore, the motion for preliminary injunction was denied in favor of the defendants.
Facts:
The defendants, upon being hired by Russell, entered into contracts which contained three relevant covenants in this case; not to compete with the plaintiffs, not to solicit the plaintiff’ customers, and not to disclose the plaintiffs’ confidential information. The defendants, for many alleged reasons, separated themselves from the plaintiff and began working for a competitor, Red Bull New York, between August and November 2007. The plaintiff claimed that the defendants were contradiction the covenants mentioned above because of his immediate drop in customers since the defendants left. The defendants claim that all of the information can be readily found on the internet and that they had not disclosed any confidential information. If the defendants were to be found guilty then the consequences would be an oppressive and unfair scenario. Therefore, the motion for preliminary injunction was denied in favor of the defendants.
Plaintiff’s Theory:
The plaintiff claimed that the now former employees were in violation of their contract and has caused his business hardship, therefore they should be terminated and not allowed to work in competition with his company.
Defendant’s Theory:
They were not in violation of the contract and that all of the information that they allegedly were providing could be obtained by public sources such as the internet. Further, that they
Nasc Services, Inc v. Jervis 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40502 (U.S. Dist. Ct. D. N.J. 2008)
Parties: * Plaintiff – Nasc Services and Russell * Defendant – Jervis, Moses, Jones, Barrow, Moffett, and Nee * Appellant – N/A * Appellee– N/A
History:
The plaintiff motioned against the defendants under the notion that they violated a covenant in their employee contracts. If the defendants were to be found guilty then the consequences would be an oppressive and unfair scenario. Therefore, the motion for preliminary injunction was denied in favor of the defendants.
Facts:
The defendants, upon being hired by Russell, entered into contracts which contained three relevant covenants in this case; not to compete with the plaintiffs, not to solicit the plaintiff’ customers, and not to disclose the plaintiffs’ confidential information. The defendants, for many alleged reasons, separated themselves from the plaintiff and began working for a competitor, Red Bull New York, between August and November 2007. The plaintiff claimed that the defendants were contradiction the covenants mentioned above because of his immediate drop in customers since the defendants left. The defendants claim that all of the information can be readily found on the internet and that they had not disclosed any confidential information. If the defendants were to be found guilty then the consequences would be an oppressive and unfair scenario. Therefore, the motion for preliminary injunction was denied in favor of the defendants.
Plaintiff’s Theory:
The plaintiff claimed that the now former employees were in violation of their contract and has caused his business hardship, therefore they should be terminated and not allowed to work in competition with his company.
Defendant’s Theory:
They were not in violation of the contract and that all of the information that they allegedly were providing could be obtained by public sources such as the internet. Further, that they