Decision and order The plaintiff and the defendants have both moved pursuant to CPLR §2221 seeking to reargue portions of a decision and order dated April 18, 2023. The motions have been opposed respectively. Papers were submitted by the parties and after reviewing all the arguments this court now makes the following determination. As recorded in the prior decision, according to the Verified Complaint, the plaintiff corporation is solely owned by Vectour Alhababi. The corporation sources, manufactures and wholesales white label garments for retail sale in the United States. The defendant Henri Alhalabi, Vectour’s brother worked at the plaintiff company since 2003. The Verified Complaint alleges Henri established the defendant corporations and diverted clients, materials and goods and funds away from the plaintiff to his other entities. The plaintiff has asserted causes of action for violations of the faithless servant doctrine, breach of fiduciary duties, tortious interference with prospective economic advantage, unfair competition and unjust enrichment. In the prior decision the court denied plaintiff’s discovery request seeking information after Henri stopped working for Vector. The court reasoned there was nothing improper with Henri soliciting Vector’s clients once Henri left Vector’s employment. The court did permit discovery sought during Henri’s employment on the grounds. Henri owed a duty to the company and any actions that did not further the best interests of the company could constitute a breach of a duty to the company. Upon reargument the plaintiff asserts the court ignored binding precedent that holds post-employment conduct that continues from conduct during employment is discoverable. Further, the plaintiff argues it is “incongruous” to allow discovery during employment but to foreclose the same conduct after employment (see, Affirmation in Support,
