Ex-Employee Avoids Injunction After Secretly Recording Colleagues
Former Graham Capital Management analyst Steven Bongiovanni unsuccessfully sought to collect on attorney fees after beating back a motion for preliminary injunction from his former employer.
November 19, 2019 at 02:06 PM
4 minute read
A Connecticut federal judge has denied a request for an award for attorney fees to an investment analyst who beat back his former employer's motion for preliminary injunction in a trade-secrets case against him.
In a case that hinged on damages, defendant Steven Bongiovanni admitted to having secretly made and kept at least five recordings of meetings with personnel at his former company, Graham Capital Management L.P. But despite the clandestine nature of the recordings, the court found the plaintiff did not prove injury, when it sought an injunction.
Bongiovanni claimed he secretly recorded conversations in order to gather information for his age-discrimination lawsuit against the company. He filed the age-discrimination suit and then was countersued. Bongiovanni maintained he never shared the information he recorded with anyone.
Bongiovanni admitted to secretly recording conversations. This is prohibited under Connecticut criminal law, which requires consent from all parties. But even with that caveat, the court denied Graham Capital's motion for preliminary injunction because the company could not "demonstrate actual and imminent injury."
The Graham Capital lawsuit states Bongiovanni recorded three research department discussions. In a deposition, Bongiovanni admitted secretly recording meetings where discussions of confidential company proprietary trading systems and models took place, but said they were only done to gather information for his age discrimination lawsuit and was not done maliciously.
The court agreed with Bongiovanni and said "failure to keep the recordings on Graham Capital's premise was an honest mistake."
Bongiovanni filed a motion for attorney fees after a federal judge ruled against Graham Capital's motion for a preliminary injunction. Graham Capital had sought an order from the court to prevent Bongiovanni from using confidential company information or trade secrets.
Bongiovanni had argued he was entitled to attorney fees because Graham Capital's action "was meritless and brought for improper, retaliatory purposes." He alleged the move was an attempt to influence his pending Superior Court age-discrimination litigation by casting him "as [a] 'bad actor,' and depleting his limited resources."
Bongiovanni prevailed on the preliminary injunction, but U.S. District Court District of Connecticut Judge Victor Bolden denied his request for attorney fees Monday.
"Bongiovanni has not shown by clear evidence that Graham Capital's claims were entirely without color and made for reasons of harassment or delay or for other improper purposes," the judge ruled.
Bongiovanni filed a December 2017 age-based discrimination lawsuit against the company in Superior Court. The company fired Bongiovanni, who was 56 years old at the time, as its senior quantitative research analyst in October 2016, after 12 years with the firm. Soon after, Graham Capital countersued in federal court, demanding the return of all company documents, recordings and computer programs. Graham Capital sued for breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty.
Bongiovanni's discrimination suit is pending. And while Graham Capital's request for a preliminary injunction was denied, the rest of its suit against Bongiovanni in federal court is pending.
Graham Capital, in its lawsuit, says Bongiovanni attended numerous research department meetings "at which there was wide-ranging discussions of GCM's confidential, proprietary, and trade secret information, including details and parameters of GCM's various trade systems and models."
The Rowayton-based investment firm manages approximately $15 billion in assets on behalf of global pensions, wealth funds, endowments and foundations, and individual investors, using a variety of quantitative investment strategies. It was founded in 1994 and has about 200 employees.
Representing Graham Capital are Day Pitney attorneys Daniel Schwartz and Howard Fetner. Both attorneys declined to comment on the case Tuesday.
Representing Bongiovanni are Mark Carey, Jill Saluck, and Elizabeth Swedock, all with Southport-based Carey & Associates. None of the attorneys responded to a request for comment.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDC Judge Rules Russia Not Immune in Ukrainian Arbitration Award Dispute
2 minute readRead the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome,' DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
3 minute readApple Asks Judge to 'Follow the Majority Practice' in Dismissing Patent Dispute Over Night Vision Technology
'Don't Be Afraid to Dumb It Down': Top Fed Magistrate Judge Gives Tips on Explaining Complex Discovery Disputes
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1People in the News—Dec. 23, 2024—Barley Snyder, Marshall Dennehey
- 2How I Made Office Managing Partner: 'Be a Lawyer First, Foremost and Always,' Says Matthew McLaughlin of Venable
- 3Bar Report - Dec. 23
- 4Recent Decisions Regarding the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
- 5The Tech Built by Law Firms in 2024
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250