"Time does not change us. It just unfolds us."
- Max Frisch
A salesman was employed pursuant to a lengthy written employment contract which, among other things, had a covenant not to compete and guaranteed a salary plus a percentage of the profits of the business.
The salesman who was fired before the end of the term of the contract, retained S&O.
The defendants attempted to enforce the restrictive covenant (not to compete). S&O took the position that the covenant was unenforceable. We also claimed the client had been wrongfully discharged and the employer had cooked the books to artificially deflate the profits.
We went to trial. The court ruled the covenant was unenforceable and so the client could engage in a similar business. During trial we established all of the elements of our case, including the possible imposition of punitive damages. Defendants, realizing the risk, paid client a nice 7 figure settlement before putting on their case.Hiring S&O was a stitch in time!
A garment manufacturer was sued by 2 assembly line workers for sexual harassment and retaliation. Their demand was $3,000,000. They had complained that a manager was offending them with sexually charged speech as well as a small toy which simulated intercourse. Before S&O was hired, the employer fired the 2 workers. Upon retention, S&O advised him to immediately offer them their jobs back, which he did. The line workers declined.
S&O got one claim dismissed by summary judgment. On the second Mr. Oppenheim recommended a small monetary offer which was declined. Case went to trial and jury found retaliation but limited damages to the amount previously offered with no punitive damages and no attorney fees ($350,000 claimed).Know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, KNOW WHEN TO WALK AWAY....
S&O client stopped paying rent because landlord refused to allow client to sublease to an unworthy subtenant. This lead to a commercial unlawful detainer action against client. Client wrongly believed landlord should pay him money on top of forgiveness of 3 months unpaid rent. S&O was able to negotiate a walk away for client with no payment by him.
Although S&O attorney strongly recommended acceptance, client insisted on going to trial with disastrous results. Court ordered him to pay back rent and attorney fees.Case Dismissed!
Sylvester & Oppenheim client, a paint manufacturer was sued for selling product alleged by one user to be defective. A billboard manufacturer claimed product did not dry properly and caused ink bleed on many billboards. Potential damages were in the millions.
Solution: S&O was able to show that the problem was caused by failure of the billboard manufacturer to apply product in accordance with client's specifications.
Final Result: Case dismissed with NO payment!