smallwheels wrote: »
What the hell kind of attorney goes from an expected return of $90,000 per plaintiff to $3240? The attorneys will keep their fees and the plaintiffs will get $1600 each. What a waste of time when bad greedy attorneys screw their clients.
There was evidence that it went beyond that. I'll see if the links to some of the old emails still exist if you're interested. It wasn't legal in the first place. These guys knew what they were doing. They agreed to it to manage their own employee costs, in spite of it limiting opportunities for a portion of those individuals. It's not always whether they're happy. Someone might make that person a better offer. If both roles are engaging, don't you think they would want that option? It's also difficult to pursue new jobs while at your current one, especially if that position involves long hours.
There are legal measures of protection against someone taking trade secrets with them that do not involve restricting where a person may work. Contracts and non-disclosure agreements provide a reasonable amount of protection, as most people do not want to be sued by their former employer.
That is actually somewhat true. The original purpose was to consolidate multiple similar cases, but it never seems to work out well.
tbell wrote: »
I on the other hand can't defend absolutes.