Chicago Business Litigation Lawyer Blog

Senn Penn Pursues Defamation Suit — Best Chicago Libel Slander and Defamation Lawyer Near Naperville — Chicago Defamation Libel and Slander Attorneys

April 1, 2016 | Peter S. Lubin and James V. DiTommaso

Celebrities often have to deal with false reports about their personal and professional lives. It’s a known hazard of the job and each celebrity deals with it in their own way.

It’s rare that a celebrity will go so far as to file a defamation lawsuit against someone for making false statements because they’re very difficult to prove. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution grants us the right to free speech and courts have constantly had to balance that right with the right of individuals to protect their careers and reputations in the event someone makes defamatory statements about them.

One of the ways the courts strikes this balance is by requiring public figures to bear a higher burden of proof when filing defamation lawsuits. The law is based on the idea that free and open discussion of public figures is in the best interests of the public, and should therefore be encouraged. As a result, the law requires public figures to be able to prove the person or entity knew the statements were false at the time they were made, and that the defamatory statements had a significant negative impact on their career. Continue reading ›

Scalia’s Death Changes Corporate Responses To Lawsuits

March 30, 2016 | Peter S. Lubin and James V. DiTommaso

The following lists some of the key factors to consider as you face business dispute or shareholder dispute litigation:

• Business Litigation Goals. It is important to consider what you hope to accomplish through business dispute litigation. It is important to consider the ideal end result as you evaluate your options and litigation strategies. Unfortunately, the ideal end results often gets lost in the highly-charged emotions of litigation so it is important to set out your litigation goals at the outset and remind yourself of your optimal resolution through the partnership litigation process. Understanding your goals will also help you evaluate potential settlement offers.

• Litigation Strategy. It is important to know where you want to go so that you can then develop a litigation strategy, a legal map of sorts, on how you plan to reach your end goal. A business litigation strategy should be developed in close collaboration with your business litigation lawyer. At DiTommaso Lubin, our knowledgeable Illinois business lawsuit attorneys can help you analyze complex legal issues, such as potential violations of fiduciary duties, alleged breach of contracts, available accounting information, and civil procedure requirements, in order to develop the appropriate business litigation game plan.

Class Action Certified As to Zillow Consultants for Unpaid Overtime

March 28, 2016 | Peter S. Lubin and James V. DiTommaso

Like everything else, automated timekeeping systems have their advantages and disadvantages. On the one hand, they make timekeeping and bookkeeping much easier and less labor intensive, especially for large corporations with many employees. On the other hand, employers who use automated timekeeping systems need to make sure they have a system in place to make adjustments whenever an employee works longer hours than they were initially scheduled for.

Under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), overtime is defined as any time spent working after eight hours a day or forty hours a week. Most employees working in the United States are entitled to one and one-half times their normal hourly rate for all overtime worked. There are exceptions to the overtime requirement, but the FLSA is very specific about the types of workers that can be considered exempt from overtime.

According to a recent class action wage and hour lawsuit against Zillow Inc., the online real estate company allegedly failed to properly compensate its inside sales consultants for the overtime they worked. The class action lawsuit alleges Zillow used an automated timekeeping system and failed to make adjustments to the timekeeping records when employees worked through their breaks or after their scheduled shift had ended. Continue reading ›

Federal Courts in Illinois Continue to Enforce Non-Compete and Non-Solicitation Agreements Even Absent Two Years of Employment

March 22, 2016 | Peter S. Lubin and James V. DiTommaso

Federal courts applying Illinois law continue to side with employers in maintaining that former employees should not avoid liability for breaching employment agreements based on duration of employment.

In Traffic Tech, Inc. v. Kreiter (2015 WL 9259544), the plaintiff, a Canadian-based transportation management company, hired defendant Jared K. as vice president of business development. The company paid him a $250,000 signing bonus and the equivalent in annual salary, plus commissions. Jared K. signed an employment agreement promising not to disclose or use the company’s confidential information or to solicit its clients or employees for 18 months after termination of employment. He also agreed not to engage in an “outside job” that would be in direct conflict with Traffic Tech’s business. Continue reading ›

Home Owners Insurance is Available to Pay the Legal Costs of a Libel Case

March 22, 2016 | Peter S. Lubin and James V. DiTommaso

Anyone who has had to face allegations of defamation would probably agree that having to deal with such a lawsuit constitutes personal injury. Defendants involved in these types of lawsuits often have to pay hefty legal fees in order to defend themselves against the allegations, to say nothing of the damage the lawsuit does to the individual’s personal and professional reputations.

What many people might not be aware of is that many wealthy and middle class people have insurance policies that cover most of these legal costs. It’s common for the defendants to react with surprise when they’re told they can have their insurance company cover most of the costs of the lawsuit, but in the latest defamation lawsuits against Bill Cosby, his insurer was the one who was surprised.

Bill Cosby is currently accused of having sexually assaulted dozens of women in the course of his very long career as a comedian and entertainer. The statute of limitations has expired on the sexual assault charges, but that hasn’t stopped his alleged victims from seeking a different form of restitution.

Ten women in three different states have filed defamation lawsuits against Cosby for denying their claims of sexual abuse and allegedly trying to tarnish their reputations after they came forward with their accusations. Continue reading ›

Venture Capital Firm Cited for Misusing Free Intern Labor

March 21, 2016 | Peter S. Lubin and James V. DiTommaso

When many people think of unpaid internships they might think of fetching coffee or sorting mail. They rarely think of unpaid interns as performing some of the primary jobs of the industry.

Internships have long been a way for new professionals to gain experience and get a foot in the door in a particular industry. Many people are willing to take unpaid internships in the hope it will mean greater opportunity for them later in their career.

The federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) does allow companies to use unpaid interns, but only if the internship is considered a valuable learning opportunity for the intern. That means it must be comparable to taking a class on a related subject, and the company cannot significant benefit from the work the unpaid interns performed. Continue reading ›

Two Years of Employment May not be Needed to Make Noncompete Agreement Enforceable

March 19, 2016 | Peter S. Lubin and James V. DiTommaso

When a former employee of a company is accused of soliciting his ex-coworkers to defect to a competitor, can he challenge enforcement of a nonsolicitation agreement on the sole ground that he did not work for the company long enough? One more Illinois federal court has answered that question in the negative.

In an opinion released March 10, 2016 in R.J. O’Brien & Associates LLC v. Robert Williamson, 2016 WL 930628, U.S. District Court Judge Robert W. Gettleman denied summary judgment to a defendant employee who argued that two years’ employment is required as consideration for restrictive employment covenants. The defendant, a former trader for the Chicago-based futures brokerage R.J. O’Brien & Associates, signed confidentiality and nonsolicitation agreements upon accepting employment at the firm in 2012. He also signed an “associated persons” agreement. The agreements stipulated, among other things, that defendant could not solicit O’Brien employees or customers for one year after leaving the company. According to the facts presented in Judge Gettleman’s opinion, defendant left the firm after one year in April 2013 and took a position at Wells Fargo Securities. Thereafter, he remained in contact with several O’Brien traders whom he attempted to convince to leave the firm to join Wells Fargo, successfully recruiting at least one. O’Brien brought a two-count complaint against him alleging breach of the agreements.

Noncompete agreements and other restrictive covenants are usually signed by an employee upon accepting employment, and are often intended to prevent pilfering of clients or trade secrets by those employees when they separate from the company. In some cases, such as the one at hand, businesses also seek to prevent a former employee from siphoning their human talent. Illinois, like most states, enforces restrictive employment covenants as long as they meet certain requirements. First, there must be some consideration, or promise, offered by the employer in return for the employee’s agreeing to refrain from taking certain actions upon termination of employment. Continue reading ›

Owners of Tony Luke’s Head to Court in Family Business Dispute

March 18, 2016 | Peter S. Lubin and James V. DiTommaso

Franchises can be a great opportunity for a business to branch out and expand while limiting their risks, but only if the contract is fair to both parties. Any time anyone signs a contract, they should read it carefully and have a qualified attorney look it over or they could find themselves bound to abide by terms they never meant to agree to.

Contracts exist in order to hold both parties accountable and make sure everyone does what they said they would do. They also provide guidelines for how to break up the business in the event one or more parties want to leave.

When going into business with family, it can be tempting to trust that they’ll do what they say they’ll do, but that’s actually a really bad idea. Business disputes and familial disputes can get very messy and even more so when they’re combined, as in the recent dispute over the cheesesteak restaurant, Tony Luke’s.

Anthony “Tony Luke” Lucidonio Sr. founded the restaurant in 1992 in Philadelphia and has since opened several more locations. In 2007, his son, Anthony “Tony” Lucidonio Jr., recommended his father and brother, Nicholas Lucidonio, become franchisors with Tony Jr. as the franchisee. The agreement allowed Tony Jr. to use the Tony Luke name in exchange for franchise fees and 15% royalties. Continue reading ›

AAMCO Barred By Court From Enforcing Non-Compete Agreement When it Overreached

March 16, 2016 | Peter S. Lubin and James V. DiTommaso

Anytime someone works closely with a particular business, whether as an employee, franchisee, or even outside counsel, they are usually granted access to sensitive information regarding how the business is run. In order to keep their trade secrets safe and protect their business interests, companies frequently require certain people to sign a non-compete agreement. This type of agreement is usually included in an employment contract or, in some cases, a franchise contract. It places restrictions on when and where the person can do business, and sometimes even who the person can do business with. For example, stealing employees and/or customers from a business is generally considered to be sabotage and most non-compete agreements prohibit such practices.

Having a party sign a non-compete agreement and getting a court to uphold the agreement are two different things. Most courts recognize the need of businesses to protect their own interests and that one of the ways they do so is through non-compete agreements. But many courts consider whether the agreement protects only the company’s legitimate business interests. If the court deems the agreement to be overly broad, it could rule that the agreement created too heavy a burden on the individual, and so is not enforceable. Continue reading ›

Crash Course in Intellectual Property Law — Chicago Business Dispute Attorneys Near Oak Brook and Naperville

March 15, 2016 | Peter S. Lubin and James V. DiTommaso

Our Chicago business dispute lawyers have extensive experience prosecuting and defending intellectual property, copyright, trademark, partner disputes and complex business lawsuits.