Mercer Management Consulting, Inc. v. Wilde
United States District Court for the District of Columbia
920 F.Supp. 219 (D.D.C. 1996)
Dean L. Wilde, Dean R. Silverman, and Moray P. Dewhurst (defendants) were management consultants and vice presidents for Strategic Planning Associates, Inc. (SPA). In 1982, each of the defendants signed an employment agreement with SPA (1982 Agreement), which prohibited the defendants from rendering competitive services to any client or prospective client of SPA, or hiring any employee of SPA, for one year following termination of employment. In 1990, SPA merged with another company, thereby forming Mercer Management Consulting, Inc. (Mercer) (plaintiff). Mercer required Wilde and Silverman to enter into a new employment agreement (1990 Agreement). The 1990 Agreement required Wilde and Silverman to discharge their duties “well and faithfully.” The 1990 Agreement also prohibited Wilde and Silverman, for a period of three years after the date of the merger, from competing with Mercer within a 50-mile radius, soliciting or accepting business from Mercer’s client or prospective client, or soliciting a Mercer employee to terminate his or her employment. The 1990 Agreement only superseded the 1982 Agreement’s competition and solicitation provisions in the event of a conflict between the two agreements. In 1993, Wilde and Silverman incorporated Dean & Co. Strategy Consultants, Inc. (Dean & Co.), which was intended to compete with Mercer. Wilde and Silverman continued to work for Mercer and attend meetings at which they took part in confidential discussions. The defendants all resigned a few months later, and Dewhurst began working for Dean & Co. None of the defendants had solicited Mercer clients or performed competing work prior to terminating their employment relationships with Mercer. However, within one year after terminating their employment, Wilde and Silverman performed services for several of Mercer’s clients and hired two of Mercer’s employees. Mercer sued the defendants for breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, and tortious interference with contractual relationships.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Green, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 174,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.