Based on your analysis, how do you believe this situation may affect public perception of your selected company? Will the public discourse reflect possible legal outcomes? Be sure to use specific examples

MBA 610 Final Project Part I, Milestone Two Guidelines and Rubric
Overview: In Milestone Two you will continue to submit sections of the memorandum. In Module Five, submit the Application of the Law to the Facts and the
Impact Assessment (IID and IIE) of the memorandum.
Prompt: In the Application of the Law to the Facts section, use the precedents you have selected in case law, regulations, and substantive law, assess the
strengths and weaknesses of your company’s arguments in court. In the Impact Assessment section, based on your analysis, how do you believe this situation
may affect public perception of your selected company? Make sure to incorporate the feedback you receive on this assignment into your final submission.
You are an intern at the legal department at one of the companies in the following scenario (Greene or Howell) and tasked with compiling a memo for your
supervisor, which will be used to formulate an official executive brief of these lawsuits.
Scenario
Mary Jane and Allen Greene, a married couple, own a high-end costume jewelry manufacturing and distribution company called Greene’s Jewelry Wholesale,
LLC. The principal place of business for Greene’s Jewelry is in Derry, New Hampshire, where it owns a warehouse and two storefronts.
Originally started in 1957, the company expanded over five decades, and it now employs 502 individuals in a variety of departments, including sales and
marketing, research and development, human resources, and manufacturing.
The primary asset of Greene’s Jewelry is its patented process for creating a synthetic gold-colored material called “Ever-Gold,” which is used in Greene’s
necklaces, rings, earrings, and bracelets. Ever-Gold is impervious to scratches, discoloration, oxidization, and is marketed as “everlasting gold.”
Jennifer Lawson, who has been employed for three years as a junior executive secretary in the research and development department at Greene’s Jewelry, has
just learned that she is pregnant. She has earned high marks on each of her annual reviews with the company, with the exception of the fact that she routinely
shows up 15 to 30 minutes late for work. Otherwise, she is deemed to be professional, articulate, diligent, and skilled in her role with the company. When Lawson
advises the head of human resources, Lisa Peele, that she may have to take additional time off as a result of some high-risk factors that she will face during the
course of her pregnancy, she is told that her position has been eliminated. The specific words are: “Congratulations Jennifer! That is exciting news for you. We do
not need to worry about time off, though, because, regrettably, I was just going to let you know that we are downsizing and no longer have a need for any of our
junior executive secretaries.”
Jennifer is distraught, and immediately returns to her desk to clear it out as instructed. She removes all of her personal items, as well as the projects she was
working on prior to her discussion with Lisa Peele. When she returns to her home, she realizes that she has inadvertently taken a draft letter to Greene’s patent
attorney, which details the secret process for creating Ever-Gold.
Although Greene’s Jewelry requires all of its executives to sign covenants not to compete and confidentiality agreements, Jennifer was only required to sign a
confidentiality agreement, by which she agreed never to disclose any information that she might acquire from Greene’s regarding the process used to create
Ever-Gold.
Panicked, and knowing that she needs a job, she calls one of Greene’s competitors, Howell Jewelry World, and advises its hiring manager that she is a former
employee of Greene’s, that she needs a job, and that she has confidential information about Ever-Gold that would help Howell compete with Greene’s. The
hiring manager at Howell, Naomi White, schedules an interview with Jennifer for the following day.
At the end of the interview, Naomi makes an offer to Jennifer to begin work with Howell immediately, but she conditions the offer on Jennifer’s execution of an
employment contract. The contract contains two specific provisions that Naomi insists Jennifer read and initial, in addition to signing the contract as a whole. One
of those provisions states that Jennifer will disclose the information she has regarding the Ever-Gold process prior to commencing work with Howell. The other
provision is a covenant to not work for any competitor of Howell for two years after she leaves the employ of Howell, irrespective of the reason for leaving, and
whether she quits or is fired. Jennifer initials both of the provisions, signs the contract for employment, and gives Naomi a copy of the letter that she removed
from her desk at Greene’s.
One week after she starts working with Howell, Jennifer is fired for chronic tardiness, and she thereafter gets a job working as a sales associate with the only
other jewelry company in town, Triumph Jewels.
Meanwhile, Greene’s learns that Howell has acquired knowledge of the secret process used to create Ever-Gold, and that Howell has tweaked the process slightly
so as to avoid any patent infringement issues but to still create a product with similar characteristics and qualities of Ever-Gold. Howell, for its part, has learned
that Jennifer is working for a competitor and fears that Jennifer will disclose the process to Triumph. Finally, one of Howell’s customers had developed a
disfiguring rash as a direct result of the new process Howell has begun using in its jewelry.
Greene’s sues Jennifer for breach of the confidentiality agreement when it learns that she has given confidential information to Howell. Jennifer counter-sues
Greene’s for wrongful termination. Howell sues Jennifer for breach of the covenant not to compete, and Jennifer counter-sues for fraudulent inducement,
believing that she was tricked into signing the employment contract with Howell and that Howell was never interested in hiring her, but was interested only in
acquiring information on the process to create Ever-Gold. Howell also sues Triumph, claiming that it knew or should have known that Jennifer was subject to a
covenant not to compete, and that Triumph should therefore be bound by its provisions.
Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed:
II. Client’s Case
D. Application of the Law to the Facts: Using the precedents you have selected in case law, regulations, and substantive law, assess the strengths
and weaknesses of your company’s arguments in court. Is it probable your company will win this legal dispute?
E. Impact Assessment
i. Based on your analysis, how do you believe this situation may affect public perception of your selected company? Will the public
discourse reflect possible legal outcomes? Be sure to use specific examples.
ii. Make suggestions on how to alleviate any damages to your selected company’s public perception going forward. Will action(s) related
to the other party be appropriate?
iii. Recommend how the company should modify specific business practices to avoid similar situations in the future.
Guidelines for Submission: Your memorandum should be 4–5 pages, using 12-point Times New Roman font and one-inch margins. You should use current APA
style guidelines for your citations and reference list. Generally speaking, the best memos include references to at least two cases for each point of law that is
mentioned. Students also earn high marks when they cite cases that appear to support a different legal resolution than the one presented by the student, and
then distinguish that case from the scenario described in this assignment. Such distinctions demonstrate exemplary understanding of the course materials
Instructor Feedback: This activity uses an integrated rubric in Blackboard. Students can view instructor feedback in the Grade Center. For more information,
review these instructions.
Critical Elements Proficient (100%) Needs Improvement (75%) Not Evident (0%) Value
Application of
the Law to the
Facts
Logically assesses the strengths
and weaknesses of company’s
arguments in court based on
selected laws and precedents,
addressing likelihood of winning
legal dispute
Assesses the strengths and
weaknesses of company’s
arguments in court based on
selected laws and precedents,
addressing likelihood of winning
legal dispute, but with gaps in
logic, detail, or relevance to
selected laws or precedents
Does not assess the strengths and
weaknesses of company’s
arguments in court based on
selected laws and precedents
24
Impact
Assessment:
Public
Perception
Logically evaluates how legal
situation may affect public
perception of company, providing
specific examples
Evaluates how legal situation may
affect public perception of
company, providing specific
examples, but has gaps in logic or
detail
Does not evaluate how legal
situation may affect public
perception of company
22
Impact
Assessment:
Damages
Makes appropriate suggestions
for how to alleviate damages to
company’s public perception,
addressing whether actions
related to other party are
appropriate
Makes suggestions for how to
alleviate damages to company’s
public perception, addressing
whether actions related to other
party are appropriate, but not all
suggestions are appropriate or
key details are missing
Does not make suggestions for
how to alleviate damages to
company’s public perception
22
Impact
Assessment:
Business
Practices
Makes appropriate
recommendations for how the
company should modify specific
business practices to avoid similar
situations in the future
Makes recommendations on how
the company should modify
specific business practices to
avoid similar situations in the
future, but not all
recommendations are
appropriate or key details are
missing
Does not make recommendations
for how the company should
modify specific business practices
to avoid similar situations in the
future
22
Articulation of
Response
Submission has no major errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, or organization
Submission has major errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, or organization
that negatively impact readability
and articulation of main ideas
Submission has critical errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, or organization
that prevent understanding of
ideas
10
Total 100%