February 22, 2012
In denying Aon's claims, Justice Fried agreed with Alliant's argument that Aon's broad interpretation of the preliminary injunction was "clearly erroneous" and that "Aon has failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that Alliant has disobeyed the Order, and thus, Alliant cannot be held in contempt." Justice Fried also confirmed the narrow scope of the preliminary injunction, reaffirming that Alliant's California-based producers are not covered by the injunction and that only one "employee of Alliant who previously worked for Aon Northeast, had a restrictive covenant, and resigned on June 13, 2011."
"We are pleased that the Court has rejected Aon's efforts to improperly expand the injunction beyond what Justice Fried previously ruled," said Jeffrey S. Klein, lead counsel for Alliant and Chair of the Employment Litigation practice at Weil. "Today's ruling helps to clarify the limited scope of the injunction and will hopefully correct some of the confusion in the marketplace. This is an important and positive development, and we will continue to defend our client against Aon."
The action underlying yesterday’s ruling involves claims by Aon that some former employees who left Aon for Alliant solicited former clients in violation of restrictive covenants in employment contracts. Alliant denies the allegations.