. .

Invest in your success.
JVRA helps lawyers win cases by providing critical information you can use to establish precedent, determine demand and win arguments.



New Haven County, CT

In this contract matter, the plaintiff corporation alleged that one of its former employees – and the defendant corporation – improperly acquired the plaintiff’s trade secrets, and attempted to improperly submit a bid for the plaintiff’s stock in order to interfere with the plaintiff’s business and economic advantage. The defendants denied any wrongdoing, and maintained that they were not liable to the plaintiff.

Both plaintiff and defendant corporations are involved in the manufacture of specialty chemicals that are used to prolong the wear and tear on various products, including: Vehicle shocks, struts and smartphone components. The defendant, Copeland, worked for the plaintiff for a long time, and had access to various proprietary and trade secret information. The defendant had entered into a non-compete agreement; however, when the defendant employee left the plaintiff’s company in ________ when he was terminated, he began working for the defendant several months later. The defendant company was involved in a bidding process to purchase the stock in the plaintiff’s company. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant former employee provided information to the defendant that was covered by his non-compete agreement, and the defendant used that information to submit a phony stock bid to purchase the shares of the plaintiff’s corporation in an attempt to drive up the plaintiff’s debt. The plaintiff contended that the bidding offer contained false statements. The plaintiff brought suit against the defendants alleging breach of contract, violation of the state’s unfair trade practices statute, and trade secrets statute. The plaintiff also contended tortious interference with contract. The plaintiff alleged that as a result of the sham bid, the investors borrowed a substantial amount of money, more than they otherwise would have had to, in order to secure the stock purchase.

The defendants denied any wrongdoing, and maintained that there was no breach of the non-compete agreements since the information was not considered trade secrets, and there was no wrongdoing on the part of the defendants. The defendants disputed the plaintiff’s claim of damages.The parties agreed to resolve the plaintiff’s claim for the sum of $________ in a settlement between the parties prior to trial.

To read the full article, please login to your account or purchase

5 ways to win with JVRA

JVRA gives you jurisdiction-specific, year-round insight into the strategies, arguments and tactics that win. Successful attorneys come to the table prepared and use JVRA to:

  1. Determine if a case is winnable and recovery amounts.
  2. Determine reasonable demand for a case early on.
  3. Support a settlement demand by establishing precedent.
  4. Research trial strategies, tactics and arguments.
  5. Defeat or support post-trial motions through past case histories.

Try JVRA for a day or a month, or sign up for our deluxe Litigation Support Plan and put the intelligence of JVRA to work for all of your clients. See our subscription plans.