New York Business Litigation Attorney Blog

An insurance company is alleging theft of trade secrets in New York City by a former administrator.

New York City business attorneys know that this kind of violation is addressed in 18 USC 1839 and 18 USC 1832. There, trade secrets are defined as any type of information or product (there's a long list that includes financial, business, scientific and more) in which the owner has taken some reasonable measures to keep the information a secret and that the information has some economic value - whether actual or potential - that is derived from it being a secret.

The actual theft of a trade secret is when a person steals that information or product (either outright or through some form of deception or fraud) when they don't have the right or permission. People can still be prosecuted under this law even if they aren't directly responsible, but if they conspire to do this with others or if they purchase or receive the trade secrets.

Trade secrets are important for New York City businesses to thrive. For example, if you have a sauce company, the recipe you use is considered a trade secret - if everyone knew it, it would no longer hold its value because anyone could reproduce it.

The same general concept applies in this case, in which New York City-based insurance company American International Group Inc. has filed a civil lawsuit against the man who used to run the aircraft leasing arm of its company. The man in question is now a billionaire in Los Angeles. AIG officials say the former administrator stole company secrets, lured customers away and started taking away AIG's business deals when he left in 2010 to work for a competing firm, Air Lease Corp., of which the 66-year-old is the owner.

AIG says that their former employee used flash drives - 16 of them - to download some 13,000 of AIG's files, including price information, previous contracts, statements of work and letters of intent. They allege that AIG likely lost several million dollars as a result of his actions, and the company is seeking to recover it through this New York City business litigation.

A spokeswoman for the Los Angeles billionaire says the claims are baseless.

The man became rich after co-founding a company called International Lease Finance Corp., also known as ILFC. In 1990, he sold that company to AIG for $1.3 billion. He stayed on with the company after that to help run operations.

But that business relationship took a bad turn when AIG accepted a federal bailout back in 2008. That bailout meant the government would have oversight of the company and its subsidiaries - including ILFC. He tried on multiple occasions to buy ILFC back from AIG, but when that didn't pan out, he left and founded Air Lease. To do so, he used contacts he had culled in the four decades he had been in the aircraft leasing industry.

Because of his regard within the industry, he was able to take customers with him, as well as some of the top executives who had headed ILFC. The lawsuit alleges those top executives worked in concert with the billionaire - in fact, at his direction - to take information from AIG while they still worked there.

It's unfortunate when business relationships don't work out. But when it happens, it's important to ensure that your financial and business interests are protected. Hiring an experienced New York City business litigation attorney is crucial to achieving that end.

Continue reading "New York City Theft of Trade Secrets Alleged by AIG" »

A lawsuit involving New York City employment retaliation and discrimination has been settled for $750,000, according to a recent report by The New York Times.

Our New York City employment discrimination attorneys understand that a black employee of the city's Human Resources department claimed that the city took action against her after she complained about how administrators secured government contracts.

That settlement was announced just three days after jurors in the Federal District Court awarded her $420,000 in compensatory damages following a trial alleging discrimination and retaliation. All but $100,000 of that sum was found against the commissioner of the agency, which is involved in servicing more than 3 million people.

A jury had also decided that the city should pay punitive damages, but the city settled on the $750,000 amount before the jury could decide how much that could be - indicating city officials believed a jury might have ruled for an even higher amount. Likely, they agreed to simply pay this and not file an appeal.

Still, the city insisted the claim had no merit, and the decision to settle was nothing more than a savvy business move in order to save taxpayers' money. However, given the jurors' findings, it seems there may have been more weight to the employee's claims than they are giving credit.

As the human resource agency's chief contracts officer, the plaintiff said she objected to what she believed was preferential treatment that was given to companies in which the employees were members of the local labor union. Back in 2007, she informed the agency's commissioner of her concerns. He responded, she said, by demoting her and slashing her salary by 20 percent.

The duties that she previously held, she said, were then given to white women who was considerably less qualified. One agency official reportedly told her to be grateful that she wasn't responsible for cleaning bathrooms. City officials later said that comment was taken out of context, adding that the agency has a history of promoting minority members, and the move toward this one employee was not indicative of a greater pattern.

With the settlement, the city maintains it has done nothing wrong. The plaintiff later told a reporter that while she disagreed with certain aspects of the settlement, she agreed to it overall.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission protects employees from being victims of retaliation if they have filed a discrimination complaint. Additionally, the Occupational Safety & Health Administration prohibits employers from retaliating against employees who have engaged in certain protected actions. That includes things like complaining about workplace safety or health hazards, reporting security concerns, cooperating with investigators or reporting illegal or potentially illegal activity.

If you're not sure whether your action will garner you protection from New York City employment retaliation, you should contact a skilled employment attorney who can help guide you through the process.

Our New York City employment retaliation attorneys have worked these cases from both angles - the employers and the employees - so we have a unique insight into how to handle them and the likely strategy of the other side.

Continue reading "New York City Employment Retaliation Claim Results in Costly Settlement" »

Great Neck employment litigation attorneys over the last year have noted an increasing number of overtime disputes. Great Neck employment litigation cases in this vein come from almost every industry and from employees of varying positions.

It appears we are far from alone in this. The federal Department of Labor is reporting a nearly 40 percent increase in the number of overtime wage lawsuits filed within the last year alone. The number of cases ballooned from nearly 8,800 in 2010 to 12,000 last year.

And now, the U.S. Supreme Court is set to decide on a case involving pharmaceutical company sales representatives who say they were wrongly denied overtime pay. The business, GlaxoSmithKline, contends the representatives weren't entitled to it because of their position within the company. The case is called Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., and justices will rule on whether salespeople are entitled to overtime and, more specifically, whether those selling pharmaceuticals are entitled to it.

The high court will hear the case this month, but a decision isn't likely to come until at least early summer.

In the meantime, there are other similar high-profile cases that have set somewhat of a precedent. There was Mario Batali, a chef with a television show who ended up settling with employees for more than $5 million over unpaid tips and overtime. And then there was Norvartis, another drug making company that shoveled over $99 million in a class action settlement stemming from overtime complaints made by its salespeople.

Both sides of the overtime issue point fingers at the other in saying they're to blame for the rising cases. The workers say employers are greedily trying to get around the federal Fair Labor Standards Act. Employers, meanwhile, say the laws are somewhat archaic, confusing and difficult to apply to the modern work place. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

Part of the increasing litigation has to do with the fact that employees these days are simply more aware of their rights and what actions they can take when those standards are violated.

On the other hand, the Fair Labor Standards Act was passed in 1938. This was at a time when workplaces looked very different than they do today. The advent of technology has altered not only the way in which we do business, but the core of the issue remains that workers should be paid fair wages for the hours they work.

But as in almost any area of law, it's been subject to a great deal of interpretation over the years. That has resulted in conflicting case law that has led to some confusion - which is why The Supreme Court is stepping in, hopefully to clarify.

It's important no matter what side you are on to consult with an experienced Great Neck employment litigation attorney who can help you sort through the specific details of your case to determine which statutes may apply and explore all your options.

Continue reading "Great Neck Overtime Disputes Similar to Case Before SCOTUS" »

New York consumer rights have been trampled in recent years by a host of varying fraud schemes.

As our New York City Consumer Rights Attorneys understand it, the state's attorney general has now issued a list of the top 10 consumer fraud complaints from New Yorkers last year. The announcement came at the outset of the National Consumer Protection Week.

Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said that arming consumers with information on how to protect themselves is one of the most effective defenses to thwarting scams, adding that the ultimate crime scene of our century is unequivocally the internet. While he vowed his office would vigorously go after those who perpetuate fraud on the greater population, he underscored that giving consumers the knowledge of how to recognize a scam, and further to report it, will make a huge difference in curbing the reach of these crimes.

The complaints received by his office were broken down like this.

10. Telecommunications. In this category, which includes cellular service, pay-per-call and phone cards, the state's attorney general received about 1,020 complaints. With calling cards, start off with one card purchased for a small amount to test and make sure additional fees don't apply.

9. Mail order. These scams involved purchases that were made either from a catalog or online. In this category, the attorney general's office received about 1,065 complaints. Before you order anything through a catalog, make sure it is a reputable company with an actual service line and a real address.

8. Construction and home repair. These would generally involve home improvement projects in which the work either wasn't completed or was done very poorly. Complaints in this category numbered about 1,210. Shop around for estimates and other consumer reviews before agreeing to a contract.

7. Retail sales. These would involve any purchase of goods, which include gift cards, rent-to-own products or clothing. In this category, Schneiderman's office received about 1,220 complaints. Know the laws and company policy regarding gift cards before you buy.

6. Mortgage fraud. This has been big all across the country, and includes loan brokers and mortgage officers, as well as deceptive practices within the foreclosure process. Of those, the attorney general's office received about 1,600 complaints. Keep an eye out for companies that offer to delay your foreclosure for an upfront payment, as well as companies that claim to be working for the government.

5. Tenant and landlord issues. These would include failure to complete repairs, harassment or failing to release security deposits. The AG's office received about 2,700 of these complaints. Ask your landlord for proof that the building is up to code, and keep your own scrupulous records.

4. Consumer-related services. This would encompass anything from restaurant or catering services to tech repairs to security systems. Of these, there were about 3,700 complaints. Have a written contract in place before you allow the work to begin.

3. Vehicle issues. These would include anything relating to the purchase, lease, repair or rental of a motor vehicle. There were about 3,300 of these complaints. Make sure you research the state's vehicle leasing laws before you sign on the dotted line.

2. Credit. This involves a host of problems involving credit card billing to debt collection to debt settlement. Schneiderman's office received about 3,840 complaints regarding these issues. You should know that debt collectors are not allowed to abuse or harass you and they aren't allowed to offer you misleading information (which doesn't mean they never do).

1. Internet. The internet was No. 1 when it came to complaints filed with the AG's office - about 4,000 in all. These included a wide range of issues, from consumer fraud to spyware to privacy problems. The attorney general's office advised to always make sure websites are secure before you give any personal or financial information.

Continue reading "Great Neck Consumer Rights Attorneys: Beware Top 10 Scams" »

In a New York education law case, the state's supreme court has issued a clear message to students: It's up to you - not your school - to determine your employment prospects.

Our New York education law attorneys understand that the case is one of a growing trend of similar suits filed across the country. Basically, students at colleges across the country - including New York Law School in lower Manhattan - say the schools misled them about what kind of future they would have once they graduated.

The plaintiffs, nine students from the New York Law School, said the school took great efforts to misconstrue the truth about their job prospects. They equated it to false advertising when school officials, in promoting the large number of recent graduates who had secured employment, failed to stipulate that many of those graduates were working only part-time or in fields that didn't even require a law degree.

Students pay premium prices to attend a prestigious law school (or any law school, really) on the expectation that they will find employment when they graduate. The students were collectively seeking $225 million in damages.

The Supreme Court, however, tossed their claim - while still expressing sympathy for the students - saying that those who are contemplating law school are generally a "sophisticated subset" of education buyers, who are fully able to weigh all their options before deciding to enroll. So basically, it's up to the student to do his or her research prior to accepting an offer to attend.

Still, the courts did say that they realized the students were entering one of the worst job markets in history, particularly for those with a legal degree.

An attorney for the New York Law School graduates said there will likely be an appeal.

This was just one case, however - a class action lawsuit that involves students from the Syracuse University College of Law, as well as 34 other schools, is still pending.

To some extent, students may expect some form of inflation when it comes to data released by the schools. The fact is, statistics can be skewed just about any way you can imagine - and still technically be accurate.

Universities in New York are governed by the state's Office of Higher Education and the state's education law, which begin in Chapter 1, Title 8 and Section 47 of New York State statutes. However, the regulations that fall within this scope generally involve how to start a college, how to implement and register a new program, how schools should handle off-campus instructions and what happens when ownership of a university changes.

The issue of whether the university is misleading its students, i.e., consumers, may fall under the Federal Trade Commission Act, which essentially says that all advertisements have to be true and non-deceptive, there must be proof to back up the claim and they must be fair.

Continue reading "New York Education Law May Be Guideline For Law School Suit" »