Running Head: MEMORANDUM

11

MEMORANDUM

Final Project Part 1

I. Memo Introduction

Legal situations are largely impossible to avoid in the course of conducting business. For this reason, the relevance of awareness and proper assessment of such scenarios when, and if, they arise cannot be overstated. In this memorandum, I come up with a formal brief of the lawsuits. In so doing, I will be seeking to provide an informed assessment to the corporate stakeholders of Greenes Jewelry Wholesale with regard to the legal concerns brought up. From the onset, it would be prudent to note that as an intern at the legal department of Greenes Jewelry Wholesale, I am convinced that the company does indeed have significant strengths in as far as its legal claim is concerned.

Jennifer Lawson, a former employee at Greenes Jewelry, did indeed sign a confidentiality agreement whereby she made a commitment to keep any information gathered relating to the creation of Ever-Gold secret. The process involved in the creation of this particular synthetic material is essentially a trade secret of Greenes Jewelry. Being a trade secret, the process was not publicly known. Further, thanks to its unique properties, the company markets the material as everlasting gold effectively meaning that it has an intrinsic economic value to the company. It is important to note that Jennifer never signed a not to compete agreement. This, however, has no connection to the issue at hand because Jennifer has not necessarily established an enterprise competing with Greenes Jewelry. On the other hand, when it comes to the legal defense of the company, it would be prudent to note that Greenes Jewelry position would be weak. The subsequent sections of this memorandum not only analyze the facts and laws relevant to the scenario presented, but also evaluate the various facts to be determined. Cases that support the position of Greenes Jewelry will also be highlighted.

II. Clients Case

A. Facts and Laws

Jennifer has been sued by Greenes Jewelry for breach of the confidentiality agreement she signed. In the said confidentiality agreement, Jennifer made a commitment not to share any information gathered in the course of her employment, relating to the processes that Greenes Jewelry uses to create and develop Ever-Gold, with a third party. Following her dismissal from the company, Jennifer unintentionally left with a letter detailing Ever-Golds secret creation process. She should have returned the said letter the moment she noticed she had it. Further, in search of new employment, she proceeded to place a call to Howell Jewelry World - one of Greenes Jewelry main competitors - and proclaim she had confidential information in relation to the creation of Ever-Gold. Following her signing of the formal employment contract at Howell, Jennifer handed over the letter detailing Ever-Golds secret creation process to Howells hiring manager.

In basic terms, it should be noted that from a legal...

More specifically, in the words of Bagley (2012), an individual misappropriates a trade secret when he or she (1) uses or discloses the trade secret of another or (2) learns of a trade secret through improper means (333). In basic terms, a trade secret is an undertaking, procedure, or even operation that is largely kept secret by an enterprise for business, economical, operational, or other similar reasons. In most instances, trade secrets often give their bearers a competitive advantage over peers in an industry or marketplace. For these, and other reasons such as the resources deployed in their...…advise to the HR head that she intended to take additional time off due to her pregnancy. In its defense, Greenes could demonstrate that Jennifer was an at-will-employee and that there was indeed a plan in place to eliminate the positions affected and that the decision to layoff Jennifer was not an isolated incident hence not discriminatory in nature. However to be able to do this, the company would have to produce evidence of the said plan in the form of organizational minutes or other documentation.

E. Impact Assessment

1. The situation described herein would most likely have an impact on public perception about Greenes. This is more so the case given that the layoff in this case was not conducted in a professional and appropriate manner. The fact that the communication to Jennifer was made at the very moment she announced her pregnancy appears discriminative. For instance, given that most customers of Greenes would ideally be women, this could alienate a significant portion of its clientele the possible legal outcomes notwithstanding.

2. There are several courses of action that Greenes could take going forward in an attempt to alleviate any damages to its public image. One such move would be the formulation of a company termination policy that provides for not only a termination notice, but also a severance. This the company would be doing as a demonstration of compassion and to minimize the probability of lawsuits in the future. However, at present, the company ought to defend itself against a clear breach of a confidentiality agreement.

3. To avoid similar situations in the future, the company could amongst other things plan layoffs more effectively, notify employees in advance of impending layoffs and the reasons for the said layoffs, implement the layoffs in a more professional manner (Jennifers dismissal was largely unprofessional),…