1. What kind of information does Sarah have that could harm Garon? 2. What type
ID: 434025 • Letter: 1
Question
1. What kind of information does Sarah have that could harm Garon? 2. What type of business was Sarah attempting to create? 3. What restrictions does the court impose?
Refernece:
ISSUES: Did Sarah breach her agreement not to disclose? Did she reveal trade secrets? Was
Garon entitled to an injunction?
DECISION: The court found that Sarah had violated the agreement through certain of her actions
and that she had revealed some information that constituted trade secrets. However, an agreement
to not disclose is still a covenant not to compete and balancing in required between Garon’s rights
and Sarah’s ability to earn a living.
The court therefore issues a tailored injunction that spelled out what Sarah could and could not do
for the next eight months.
Sarah is enjoined from soliciting business for the Supplier from any cheese manufacturer whose
account she was assigned to manage during the twelve months before she stopped working for
Garon. This injunction shall last for eight months following entry of this preliminary injunction.
This preliminary injunction does not prevent Sarah from servicing any of these cheese
manufacturers who independently become customers of the Supplier by means other than her
solicitations.
Sarah is enjoined from soliciting business for the Supplier from any cheese manufacturer she
knows is or was a Garon customer by mentioning or using any specific information in the
solicitation about their past purchasing needs or sales terms. This restriction includes mentioning
in the solicitation the specifications of the products she knows from her experience at Garon were
sold to that cheese manufacturer by Garon.
This preliminary injunction does not prevent Sarah from responding to a cheese manufacturer's
request for products that it has purchased from Garon so long as the request for those products is
initiated by the cheese manufacturer.
Sarah is enjoined from referring in her solicitations to (1) Garon or (2) any other information from
which a cheese manufacturer is likely to draw the conclusion that the Supplier provides Garon
with the products Garon sells under its name. This restriction includes, but is not limited to,
mentioning in the solicitation the specific weights of products in conjunction with the method of
packaging that were sold exclusively by Garon (e.g., 43–pound pails) and inviting the cheese
manufacturer to compare the quality audit documentation of Garon and the Supplier.
This preliminary injunction does not prohibit Sarah from responding to a cheese manufacturer's
request for products packaged in the specific weights and methods sold by Garon or for a list of
the packaging weights and methods available from the Supplier, so long as the request is initiated
by the cheese manufacturer.
Explanation / Answer
1. It can be inferred from the case that Sarah has confidential information about the products sold by Garon’s company. These details can be beneficial for the competitor company. Also Sarah can have the information of customers in Garon’s client list. This information can be critical for the business and ay lead to customer poaching.
2. Sarah was planning to work with an objective to make a good networking circle with the suppliers and Garon’s business competitors. She had extracted information from Garon’s business to fulfill this only objective.
3. The court had decided that Sarah had violated some of the terms of the agreement. Court had decided a tailored injunction and had restricted Sarah’s activities for the next 8 months. Sarah was also enjoined from soliciting business from any of the suppliers. Also she could not maintain contact with any of the clients for whom she had worked in the past when she was working in Garon’s company.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.