Legal Memo Paper Sample
To:
From:
Re: Joe and Jane
Date:
Legal Memo
Questions Presented
Whether Joe violated ACME Auto Works’s trade secret rights?
Whether Jane and Joe formed a partnership?
Whether the promise made by Joe to one of ACME’s top customers is enforceable?
Whether there are valid excuses for nonpayment of the rent?
Whether Joe can be liable for undue interference with ACME’s prospective advantages?
Whether Joe may face criminal liability under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act?
Brief Answers
Joe violated ACME’s trade secret rights.
Jane and Joe formed a partnership.
The promise made by Joe to one of ACME’s top customers is enforceable
There are no valid excuses for nonpayment of the rent.
Joe can be partially liable for undue interference with ACME’s prospective advantages
It is unlikely that Joe will face criminal liability under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
Facts
Joe and Jane quit their jobs to engage in business and discussed their roles in it. They leased the premise and contributed $ 50, 000 each. Joe previously worked for the ACME. He found out that his access to the ACME’s network was not terminated and took the contact of ACME’s clients from the database, contacted one of the clients and convinced him to put off signing the contract with ACME until motor is in production. They incurred $500,000 in debt and are facing eviction for failing to pay rent.
Discussion
Intellectual property
In order to see whether one’s trade secret rights have been violated, it is first necessary to see whether the following two elements can be established. The first element is whether a trade secret exists (Pagnattaro, Cahoy, Magid,, Reed, & Shedd, 2016). The second element is whether the information constituting the trade secret has been misappropriated (Pagnattaro et al, 2016).
A trade secret is defined as “any form of knowledge or information not being generally known to others, or readily ascertainable by proper means and has been the subject of reasonable efforts by the owner to maintain secrecy” (Pagnattaro et al, 2016, p. 317). Here, the question is whether the contact information of ACME’s customers constituted a trade secret. Client lists can constitute a trade secret (Al Minor & Assoc., Inc. v. Martin, 2008). The question is whether was generally known to others, or readily ascertainable by proper means. It appears from the facts that information was not generally available, but was only accessible by those, who had an access to the ACME’s network. Furthermore, it appears that only ACME’s employees had an access to the network, since Joe’s access was supposed to be terminated as he left the employment. Therefore, it can be said the contacts of customers were not generally available and ACME took reasonable measures to maintain secrecy, since only the employees had an access to the information. Hence, contacts of the ACME customers constituted a trade secret.
The next question is whether the information has been misappropriated. Misappropriation refers to improper acquisition of the information (Pagnattaro …
