First Circuit Refuses to Toll EMC Noncompete

Tuesday, September 6th, 2011 | Noncompetition Litigation | No Comments

Image via Wikipedia

In EMC Corp. v. Arturi, the First Circuit Court of Appeals refused to enforce EMC Corporation’s noncompetition agreement against its former employees beyond the time period in the employees’ employment contract.  EMC requested that the court extend its injunction against its former employees barring them from using any EMC confidential business information.

In 2007, EMC purchased a consulting firm founded by the defendants for over $200 million.  EMC also hired the defendants as employees, but after one year the defendants left to found a competing firm.  Subsequently, EMC sued to enforce the provisions of a noncompetition agreement the defendants had signed.

Justice David Souter, writing the opinion for the court, held that injunctive relief would be inappropriate following the expiration of the noncompetition agreement even when there has been a delay in enforcement caused by legal appeals.

Related articles

• Ninth Circuit Holds Rule 68 Offer of Judgment to Class Representative Does Not Moot Class Action (unpaidovertimeblog.com)

R. Scott Oswald Interviewed by Legal Bisnow

Friday, August 12th, 2011 | The Employment Law Group | No Comments

The Employment Law Group Managing Principal, R. Scott Oswald, was interviewed by Legal Bisnow in an article titled Money for Whistleblowers in which Mr. Oswald explains the new SEC Whistleblower Reward Program.  The SEC will reward whistleblowers with between 10 and 30 percent of any penalties collected that total more than $1 million.  Companies will hopefully realize that they can’t keep widespread fraud within the corporate veil, prompting a more open corporate culture and fair treatment of whistleblowers.

Related articles

• TELG Principal Named Top Ten Leader in Employment Law for Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Area (executivecounselblog.com)
• Qui Tam Cases – Taking the Guesswork out of Future Lawsuits (employmentlawgroupblog.com)
• R. Scott Oswald participates in Alexandria Human Rights Commission meeting on Gaps in Age Discrimination Protections under Federal and Virginia Employment Laws (workplacediscriminationblog.com)
• TELG Managing Principal Scott Oswald Quoted on Senator Johnson’s Executive Compensation (executivecounselblog.com)
• OSHA Announces Measures to Improve Whistleblower Protection Program (employmentlawgroupblog.com)

TELG Managing Principal Scott Oswald Quoted on Senator Johnson’s Executive Compensation

Tuesday, July 12th, 2011 | Executive Compensation | No Comments

Image via Wikipedia

R. Scott Oswald, Managing Principal of The Employment Law Group® law firm, was quoted by Talking Point Memo (TPM) on the $10 million deferred compensation package of Wisconsin Republican Senator Ron Johnson.  Some election lawyers believe that the compensation will raise red flags for the IRS and that the sum might instead constitute an illegal campaign contribution by his former employer.  Sen. Johnson stated that he, by himself, selected the amount of his deferred compensation before leaving his employer and running for Senate.

Mr. Oswald made the following observations for Talking Points Memo:

• “A prudent lawyer structuring this transaction would want to confirm the contours of the package at the time it was committed, otherwise, the IRS could tax it differently than the parties determined at the time.”
• “Deferred compensation needs to be structured in such a way that there isn’t even an inference of impropriety because of the executive’s duty of loyalty to the company.”
• Johnson’s interest rate of .69 percent “certainly would have to be lower than any definition of what the market rate would be – it would raise significant red flags.”
• Even though Johnson owned the company and controlled its decisions and finances, that’s no excuse for failing to document loans or deferred compensation agreements.
• “Even when it’s a closely held corporation, it’s a separate entity” under the law, and the individuals who work for the corporation have a fiduciary obligation to meet their duty of loyalty to the company … to treat it like a separate entity when there’s this kind of [financial deals] involved.”

The Employment Law Group® is a law firm headquartered in Washington, D.C. and with locations in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Largo, Maryland.  Its practice focuses on negotiating executive compensation packages, representing whistleblowers, and handling many other employment matters.

Related articles

• TELG Principal on D.C. Bar Executive Employment Agreements Panel (executivecounselblog.com)
• Qui Tam Cases – Taking the Guesswork out of Future Lawsuits (employmentlawgroupblog.com)
• TELG Quoted by Investment News About Proposal to Weaken SEC Whistleblower Reward Program (employmentlawgroupblog.com)

Tags: Law firm, Lawyers and Law Firms, Washington DC

TELG Principal on D.C. Bar Executive Employment Agreements Panel

Wednesday, June 15th, 2011 | Executive Compensation, Executive Compensation Attorney, The Employment Law Group | No Comments

On June 20, 2011, R. Scott Oswald, Managing Principal of The Employment Law Group® law firm, will serve as a panelist at a D.C. Bar CLE entitled “Drafting and Negotiating Executive Employment Agreements.”  The Employment Law Group® has substantial experience advising corporate officers on their executive compensation packages.  The panel will concentrate on D.C. law, but will also compare and contrast the law and practice in Maryland, Virginia, and Pennsylvania.  Register for the event at this website.

Related articles

• TELG Principal Named Top Ten Leader in Employment Law for Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Area (executivecounselblog.com)

The Employment Law Group® Negotiates $1.1 Million Settlement for Client

Thursday, March 3rd, 2011 | Breach of Contract, Executive Compensation, Executive Compensation Attorney, The Employment Law Group | No Comments

The Employment Law Group® law firm negotiated a $1.1 million settlement for their client, an executive alleging his employer breached the employment contract.  The client wrote, “… without [The Employment Law Group’s ®] assistance, I never would have gotten the outcome we have.”  To learn more about our employment contract disputes practice, click here.

MSPB Affirms Right to Review for Federal Workers in National Security Positions

Wednesday, January 19th, 2011 | Executive Compensation Attorney | No Comments

In the case of Conyers v. Dep’t of Defense, The Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) affirmed the right of federal employees to have the merit of their denial of eligibility for national security positions reviewed by the MSPB.  Without such basic protections, government agencies could classify nearly any position as relating to national security, deny a federal employee eligibility for the position (even if they are currently working in the position), and then fire them without any possibility for review by an independent body or further justification by the agency. 

The appellant, Rhonda Conyers was an Accounting Technician working for the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) until the agency indefinitely suspended her because she had been “denied eligibility to occupy a sensitive position by [the agency’s] Washington Headquarters Consolidated Adjudications Facility.”  The agency only stated that her position required her to have access to sensitive information, she had been denied access, and therefore she did not meet a qualification requirement of her position.  Seemingly at odds with the agency’s findings was the fact that the agency allowed Conyers to work at her position for nearly two years after determining she was not eligible to hold a national security position.  Additionally, the agency chose not to pursue her removal under an existing statute, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 7532, which allows agencies to remove employees for national security purposes but affords the employees some amount of due process such as requiring the agency to state its justification.  Instead, the agency chose to remove Conyers without affording her even the most basic of due process rights.

The MSPB was careful to distinguish the Conyers case from Egan v. Dep’t Navy, a Supreme Court case in which the court acknowledged that the President has some authority to “classify and control access to information bearing on national security.”  Relying on its previous decision in Jacobs v. Dep’t of the Army, the MSPB stated:

The Supreme Court’s decision in Egan was narrow in scope and specifically applied only to security clearance revocations.  As the protector of the government’s merit systems, the [MSPB] is not eager to expand the scope of the rationale in Egan to divest federal employees whose positions do not require a security clearance of basic protections against non-meritorious agency actions.

…

The [MSPB] may exercise its full statutory review authority and review the agency’s determination that [Conyers] is no longer eligible to hold a “sensitive” position, because this appeal does not involve a discretionary agency decision regarding a security clearance.

Click on the following links to learn more about Federal Employee Rights or to get the answers to many Common Security Clearance Questions.

TELG Principal Named Top Ten Leader in Employment Law for Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Area

Thursday, December 30th, 2010 | Executive Compensation Attorney | No Comments

R. Scott Oswald, Managing Principal of The Employment Law Group® law firm, was named as one of the top ten leaders in employment law for the Greater Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Area.  Top Ten Leaders are selected primarily based on five criteria:

1. Reputation among peers, based on multiple interviews with other professionals;
2. Leadership and written work on behalf of professional organizations, such as sections and committees of state professional organizations;
3. Number of years practicing in their area of expertise;
4. Degree of focus on a practice area; and
5. Volume of clients;

R. Scott Oswald also serves as President-Elect of the Metropolitan Washington Employment Lawyers Association, lectures extensively on employment and whistleblower law, and has authored numerous articles on innovations and trends in state and federal law.  For more information about The Employment Law Group® and to view R. Scott Oswald’s full biography, click here.

Judge Allows Options Backdating Case to Move Forward Against Microtune CFO

Thursday, November 4th, 2010 | Executive Compensation Attorney | No Comments

Judge Jane Boyle of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas refused to grant summary judgment, allowing the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to continue its prosecution of Nancy Richardson, the former Chief Financial Officer and General Counsel of Microtune Inc. – a designer of radio tuners.  The SEC alleges that, along with former CEO Douglas Bartek, Richardson committed fraud by backdating options to dates when Microtune’s share price was low (thus increasing the option’s monetary value) without disclosing the backdating in its financial statements as required by law.  For more information about The Employment Law Group® and its SEC Whistleblower Practice, click here.

Federal Judge Dismisses Zurich Am. Ins. Co.’s Claims that Former Sales Manager Conspired with Employee to Breach Noncompete

Thursday, October 28th, 2010 | Executive Compensation Attorney | No Comments

According to Law360, a federal judge for the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia dismissed Zurich American Insurance Co.’s claims against its former regional sales manager, David Neuenschwander. Zurich alleged that Neuenschwander conspired with another former employee, Toby Turbyfill, to breach Turbyfill’s noncompete agreement with Zurich by soliciting Zurich’s customers. The court found that Zurich failed to show that Neuenschwander even knew about Turbyfill’s noncompete agreement or had engaged in any improper or unlawful conduct. For information about The Employment Law Group® law firm and Non-Compete Litigation, click here.

IBM Sues Former Executive for Return of $350,000 Signing Bonus

Monday, September 13th, 2010 | Executive Compensation Attorney | No Comments

On Sept 3, 2010, IBM filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland alleging that former executive David Zolet breached a contract requiring him to repay a $350,000 signing bonus.  According to the complaint, Zolet received a $350,000 signing bonus payable over his first two months of employment.  Zolet signed an offer letter and repayment agreement stipulating that the bonus was not earned until he completed two years of employment and that he is obligated to repay the bonus “unless [his] departure is the result of a unilateral determination by IBM without cause to end [his] employment.”  The complaint states that IBM has verbally requested Zolet to return the money but he has refused and “represented to IBM that he will not do so unless IBM satisfies certain conditions that are not required by either the Offer Letter or Repayment Agreement.”  A copy of the complaint is available here. 

Whether you need help negotiating an executive compensation or severance package or litigating an employment-related contract dispute, you can trust the experienced attorneys of The Employment Law Group® to safeguard your interests and fight of your rights.  To learn more about firm’s Employment Contract Dispute Practice, click here.