breach of employment contract litigation: contract...
TRANSCRIPT
The audio portion of the conference may be accessed via the telephone or by using your computer's
speakers. Please refer to the instructions emailed to registrants for additional information. If you
have any questions, please contact Customer Service at 1-800-926-7926 ext. 10.
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A
Breach of Employment Contract Litigation:
Contract Interpretation, Materiality of
Breach, Defenses, Damages
Today’s faculty features:
1pm Eastern | 12pm Central | 11am Mountain | 10am Pacific
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 2017
Andrew (Andy) Boling, Partner, Baker & McKenzie, Chicago
Meredith Kaufman, Partner, Baker & McKenzie, New York
JoLynn M. Markison, Partner, Dorsey, Minneapolis
D. Randle Moody, II, Of Counsel, Jackson Lewis, Greenville, S.C.
R. Scott Oswald, Managing Principal, The Employment Law Group, Washington, D.C.
Tips for Optimal Quality
Sound Quality
If you are listening via your computer speakers, please note that the quality
of your sound will vary depending on the speed and quality of your internet
connection.
If the sound quality is not satisfactory, you may listen via the phone: dial
1-866-370-2805 and enter your PIN when prompted. Otherwise, please
send us a chat or e-mail [email protected] immediately so we can address
the problem.
If you dialed in and have any difficulties during the call, press *0 for assistance.
Viewing Quality
To maximize your screen, press the F11 key on your keyboard. To exit full screen,
press the F11 key again.
FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY
Continuing Education Credits
In order for us to process your continuing education credit, you must confirm your
participation in this webinar by completing and submitting the Attendance
Affirmation/Evaluation after the webinar.
A link to the Attendance Affirmation/Evaluation will be in the thank you email
that you will receive immediately following the program.
For additional information about continuing education, call us at 1-800-926-7926
ext. 35.
FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY
Dorsey Labor & Employment
Breach of Employment Contract
Litigation: Claims and Remedies
JoLynn Markison [email protected] 612.492-6143
4
Employee Breach of Contract Claims
5
Most Common Allegations
Employee Claims:
• Wrongful Termination
– Term of years agreements
– Agreements allowing termination only “for cause”
• Failure to Pay Wages/Bonus/Commissions
• Failure to Pay Severance (usually dependent upon reason for termination)
6
Company Strategy: Defending
Employee Claims
• Arbitration Clauses?
• Class Action Waivers?
• Defend?
• Settle?
7
Employer Breach of Contract Claims
8
Most Common Allegations In Breach of
Contract Claims
Employer Claims:
• Breach of Restrictive Covenants
– Non-competition
– Non-solicitation
• Customers
• Vendors
• Suppliers
• Employees
• Consultants
• Breach of Confidentiality/Failure to Return Employer Property
9
Breach of Confidentiality/Failure to Return
Property: Why Companies Should Be Concerned
“Half of employees who left or lost their jobs in the last year kept confidential corporate data, and 40 percent plan to use it in their new jobs.”
What's Yours Is Mine: How Employees are Putting Your Intellectual Property at Risk, Symantec Survey (2013)
10
Breach of Confidentiality/Failure to Return
Property: Why Companies Should Be Concerned
• Client intellectual property may walk out the door
– $45-300 billion in annual losses due to trade secret misappropriation
– Increase of theft by employees during recession
11
Breach of Restrictive Covenants:
Why Have Them?
• Provide protection from competitors poaching employees and theft of information and relationships
• Put employees and the competition on notice
• Create right to bring claims against departing employees/consultants for breach of contract and against your competition for tortious interference with your contracts
• Immediate action/remedies when assets are threatened
12
Preventing and Responding to
Employee Breaches
• Departing Employee Protocols
• Reminder of Obligations
• Cease and Desist
• Lawsuit
– TRO
– Preliminary Injunction
– Monetary Damages
– Attorneys’ Fees (for tortious interference or if provided by contract)
13
©2017 Jackson Lewis P.C.
Contracts: Are They
Worth the Paper They Are
Written On?
D. Randle Moody, II
Jackson Lewis P.C. | Greenville
864-232-7000
Employee Agreements
are Contracts
16
Contract Law Applies to Employee Agreements
Elements—offer/acceptance/consideration
Offers can be express or implied
Acceptance can be through word or deeds
Consideration (something new for
something new)
Illusory contract if not supported by
consideration
Mutuality of obligation
Ambiguous contracts are not enforceable
(but can become enforceable through
undertaking)
17
Non-Compete Agreements
Non-Solicitation Agreement
Non-Disclosure/Confidentiality Agreements
18
Employment Contracts
Handbooks (some states have statutes)
Offer Letters
Statements
• Keep your nose clean.
• You have to work really hard to get fired here.
• We have a progressive discipline policy.
19
Unilateral or Implied Contracts
Material Breach
v.
Immaterial Breach
20
Defenses to Contract Claims
Failure of consideration (no mutual obligation)
Parole evidence
(reliance on evidence outside contract to prove
terms)
Mutual mistake
Frustration of purpose
(object of contract no longer viable)
Act of God (e.g., company wiped out by
hurricane)
Breach by other side (anticipatory repudiation)
21
Actual damages
• Out of Pocket Losses
• Lost Profits
• Disgorgement of illegal gains
Interest on actual damages
Attorney’s fees – only if contract
grants it
No compensatory or punitive damages
Court costs
Contract Damages
22
23
THANK YOU
With 800 attorneys practicing in major locations
throughout the U.S. and Puerto Rico, Jackson Lewis provides the resources to
address every aspect of the employer/employee
relationship.
jacksonlewis.com
Defenses to Contract Based Claims Meredith Kaufman Andrew Boling
November 21, 2017
© 2017 Baker & McKenzie Compliance Consulting LLC
Defenses to Contract Claims
25
• At-Will Employment
• Void or Voidable
• Breach of Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing
• Failure to Mitigate Damages
© 2017 Baker & McKenzie Compliance Consulting LLC
At-Will Employment
26
• “Employment-at-will” means the employee can be terminated for any reason; can be a good reason, a bad reason, or no reason.
• Often arises in cases of implied contract, or no contract.
• Handbooks and other employment policies
• Promises or representations
© 2017 Baker & McKenzie Compliance Consulting LLC
At-Will Employment as a Defense
27
• Smalley v Dreyfus Corp., 10 N.Y.3d 55 (NY 2008)
• Plaintiffs claimed they relied on “no merger” promise in accepting and continuing employment, and were terminated after subsequent merger.
• Contracts clearly stated Plaintiffs were at-will employees.
• Fraudulent inducement claim reinstated by Appellate Division
• NY Court of Appeals:
• Viewed as a breach of contract case
• At-will employee cannot reasonably rely on employer’s promise not to terminate contract
• No independent injury to support a tort claim
© 2017 Baker & McKenzie Compliance Consulting LLC
Void Contracts vs. Voidable Contracts
28
• A contract is “void” if unenforceable as a matter of law
• Has no legal or binding effect; null from the beginning
• Missing essential element of contract (e.g., no consideration)
• Illegal or contrary to public policy
• NCH Corp. v. Share Corp., 757 F.2d 1540 (5th Cir. 1985)
• Unreasonable covenants not to compete are void rather than merely voidable “because of the public policy against restraints of trade and the hardships resulting from interference with a person's means of livelihood.”
© 2017 Baker & McKenzie Compliance Consulting LLC
Voidable Contracts
29
• A “voidable” contract can be cancelled by one or more parties for reasons such as:
• Complaining party may elect to be bound or not
• Schiavello v. Delmarva Sys. Corp., 61 F. Supp. 2d 110 (D. Del. 1999)
• After-acquired evidence of resume fraud is complete defense to breach of contract claim)
• Material issues of fact precluded summary judgment
Capacity Mistake
Duress Coercion
Fraud Unconsciona
ble
© 2017 Baker & McKenzie Compliance Consulting LLC
Voidable Contracts
30
• Voidable contracts can be ratified, and ratification is also a defense!
• Nayak v. McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC, No. 1:15-CV-00933, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125059 (M.D. Pa. Sep. 13, 2016)
• Individual sought to invalidate a release based on economic duress; not valid in PA
• Court also found that he ratified the release by retaining the consideration
© 2017 Baker & McKenzie Compliance Consulting LLC
Mitigation of Damages
31
• What is the duty to mitigate?
• Any party claiming breach of contract has duty minimize the harm caused by the breach
• Same concept applies in most tort claims
• Similar obligations under most anti-discrimination statutes
• Usually plead as an affirmative defense and employer bears the burden of proof
• Defendant must show plaintiff’s failure to exercise reasonable diligence and there was a reasonable likelihood plaintiff might have found comparable work by exercising reasonable diligence
© 2017 Baker & McKenzie Compliance Consulting LLC
Mitigation of Damages—Continued
32
• Critical issue—what is reasonable?
• Obligation to search for and accept comparable employment
• No obligation to accept just any job
• Reasonable in the context of the employee’s prior position and compensation, skills and training/educational history
• General objective is to keep plaintiff from remaining idle and doing nothing
© 2017 Baker & McKenzie Compliance Consulting LLC
Mitigation of Damages-Continued
33
• Parker v Twentieth Century Fox 474 P.2d 689 (1970)—Case study for mitigation in context of contract breach
• What does the employer need to show?
• Praseuth v Rubbermaid, Inc. 406 F. 3d 549 (10th Cir. 2005)—Balancing what employee should have done vs. what employee did to mitigate
• Broadmax v City of New Haven, 415 F.3d. 265 (2d Cir. 2005)—Proving the defense when the plaintiff does nothing
Mattenson v Baxter Healthcare Corp., 438 F.3d 763 (7th Cir. 2006)-What are the boundaries of comparable employment?
© 2017 Baker & McKenzie Compliance Consulting LLC
Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing
34
• Restatement (Second) of Contracts 205—”Every contract imposes upon each party a duty of good faith and fair dealing in its performance and its enforcement”
• Defenses when the Plaintiff/Employee alleges breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing:
• Equal bargaining power
• Sophistication standard
• Represented by counsel in negotiation of agreement
• Absence of bad faith or ill motive—a party to the contract is not required to act altruistically
© 2017 Baker & McKenzie Compliance Consulting LLC
Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing-Cont.
35
• Winshall v. Viacom Intern., Inc. 76 A.3d 808 at 816 (Del.2013)—Duty of good faith and fair dealing cannot be applied when plaintiff seeks contractual protections plaintiff failed to secure at the bargaining table.
• No obligation for defendant to surrender protections afforded by statute or under the express terms of the contract
• Standard will vary from state to state
• Delaware tends to take a dim view of this theory, as evidenced in Nemec v. Shader, 991 A.2d 1120 (Del. 2010)
• Plaintiff may have to chose between breach of contract or breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing—alternative pleading may not be available. Somers v. Somers, 613 A.2d 1211, 1214 (Pa.Super. Ct. 1992)
© 2017 Baker & McKenzie Compliance Consulting LLC
Thank You
36
Andrew Boling
Baker & McKenzie, Chicago
Meredith Kaufman
Baker & McKenzie, New York