Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Procter & Gamble Co. v. Stoneham

747 N.E.2d 268 (2000)

Case BriefQ&ARelatedOptions
From our private database of 22,600+ case briefs...

Procter & Gamble Co. v. Stoneham

Ohio Court of Appeals

747 N.E.2d 268 (2000)

Facts

Procter & Gamble Co. (Procter & Gamble) (plaintiff) was a large corporation that manufactured, among other things, hair-care products. Paul Stoneham (defendant) was a senior-level manager at Procter & Gamble. Stoneham was responsible for the international marketing of Procter & Gamble’s hair-conditioning products. He compiled data that Procter & Gamble obtained on foreign markets and created models. Stoneham had access to plans to develop and introduce new hair-conditioning products, and he helped create a confidential 10-year plan to market Procter & Gamble’s best-selling conditioner. When Stoneham was first hired at Procter & Gamble, he signed a confidentiality agreement. After being at Procter & Gamble for 10 years, Stoneham was offered company stock options in return for signing a noncompete agreement that prohibited Stoneham from working for a competitor for three years after leaving Procter & Gamble. Stoneham signed the noncompete agreement. After working for Procter & Gamble for 13 years, Stoneham left for a job as president of the international arm of Alberto-Culver. Alberto-Culver manufactured some hair conditioners that competed with Procter & Gamble’s hair conditioners. Procter & Gamble sued Stoneham for breach of his noncompete agreement and misappropriation of trade secrets. The trial court dismissed Proctor & Gamble’s claims, holding that Procter & Gamble had failed to show that either: (1) the parties had an enforceable noncompete agreement or (2) Stoneham had been exposed to confidential information and trade secrets. Procter & Gamble appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Hildebrandt, J.)

What to do next…

  1. 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 519,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. 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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 519,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 22,600 briefs, keyed to 984 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.

Questions and answers

Have a question about this case?

Sign up for a free 7-day trial and ask it

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 519,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 22,600 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership