June 21, 2011
The Firm successfully defended a motion for a preliminary injunction seeking, among other things, to enjoin a current employee of the Firm’s client — who formerly worked for the plaintiff — from working for the client and to prevent the client from both doing business with many of its current customers and soliciting new clients. Pre-litigation efforts to demonstrate to the adversary that it should not proceed were unsuccessful. In opposing the motion, the Firm served and filed numerous opposition papers detailing why the plaintiff, a competitor of the corporate defendant, was not entitled to a preliminary injunction. The Firm prepared numerous witnesses for a full-blown evidentiary hearing. On the morning of the preliminary injunction hearing, the plaintiff capitulated before the hearing commenced, and essentially admitted it was doing so based on the opposition papers. As a result, the plaintiff settled the case on favorable terms to the Firm’s client. The settlement allows the employee at issue to continue to work for the Firm’s client and allows it to continue to service its current customers, as well as solicit prospective clients. U.S. Heat Treaters, a division of Modern Industries, Inc. v. Jason Ryan and PIHT, LLC, Index No. 2011-488 (Pa. Ct. C.P. Elk County).