Denson v. Donald J. Trump for President, Inc.
Citation | 530 F.Supp.3d 412 |
Decision Date | 30 March 2021 |
Docket Number | 20 Civ. 4737 (PGG) |
Parties | Jessica DENSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. DONALD J. TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT, INC., Defendant. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
David K. Bowles, Bowles & Johnson, David A. Schulz, Joseph Slaughter, Ballard Spahr LLP, New York, NY, John Langford, Protect Democracy, Los Angeles, CA, Anne Harden Tindall, Brittany Marie Williams, Protect Democracy, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff.
Jared Evan Blumetti, Patrick Thomas McPartland, LaRocca Hornik Rosen & Greenberg LLP, New York, NY, for Defendant.
Plaintiff Jessica Denson brings this putative class action against Defendant Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. (the "Campaign"), seeking a declaratory judgment that an agreement she entered into with the Campaign (the "Employment Agreement") – which contains non-disclosure and non-disparagement clauses – is void, as well as an injunction prohibiting enforcement of the non-disclosure and non-disparagement clauses. Pending before the Court are the Campaign's motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 23) and Denson's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 19).
For the reasons stated below, the Campaign's motion to dismiss will be denied, and Denson's motion for summary judgment will be granted to the extent that the Employment Agreement's non-disclosure and non-disparagement provisions (Employment Agreement (Dkt. No. 22-1) ¶¶ 1-2) will be declared invalid and unenforceable as to Denson.
In August 2016 – soon after Donald J. Trump was selected as the Republican Party's nominee for the office of President of the United States – Denson applied to work for the Campaign, and was hired as a national phone bank administrator. (Pltf. R. 56.1 Stmt. (Dkt. No. 21) ¶¶ 6-7, 9; Def. R. 56.1 Cntrstmt. (Dkt. No. 35) at 3-4) Prior to beginning work, the Campaign required Denson – along with other Campaign employees – to sign the Employment Agreement, a form contract that contains non-disclosure and non-disparagement clauses. (Pltf. R. 56.1 Stmt. (Dkt. No. 21) ¶¶ 10-11) Denson remained an employee of the Campaign until November 10, 2016. (Id. ¶ 12)
The Employment Agreement provides as follows:
(Employment Agreement (Dkt. No. 22-1) ¶ 1) (emphasis in original).2
The Employment Agreement defines "Family Member Company" as "any entity, partnership, trust or organization that, in whole or in part, was created by or for the benefit of any Family Member or is controlled or owned by any Family Member." (Id. ¶ 6(c)) The Agreement defines "Trump Company" as "any entity, partnership, trust or organization that, in whole or in part, was created by or for the benefit of Mr. Trump or is controlled or owned by Mr. Trump." (Id. ¶ 6(f)) And the Agreement defines "Trump Person" as "each of Mr. Trump, each Family Member, each Trump Company (including but not limited to the Company) and each Family Member Company." (Id. ¶ 6(g))
As to non-disparagement, the Employment Agreement provides as follows:
During the term of your service and at all times thereafter you hereby promise and agree not to demean or disparage publicly the Company, Mr. Trump, any Trump Company, any Family Member, or any Family Member Company or any asset any of the foregoing own, or product or service any of the foregoing offer, in each case by or in any of the Restricted Means and Contexts and to prevent your employees from doing so.
(Id. ¶ 2)
As to remedies for breach of the Employment Agreement, the Agreement provides as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Cambridge Capital LLC v. Ruby Has LLC
...limited even where the agreement is drafted explicitly to contain no limitation. See, e.g. , Denson v. Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. , 530 F.Supp.3d 412, 431-32 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 30, 2021) (finding confidentiality provision unenforceable under New York law in part because the provision h......
-
Buari v. City of New York
... ... 2010) (citing Chambers v. Time Warner, Inc. , 282 F.3d 147, 153 (2d Cir. 2002) ; and Hayden v ... ...
-
Tessanne v. Children's Hosp. Med. Ctr. of Akron
... ... Bush v. State Indus., Inc"., 599 F.2d 780, 784 (6th ... Cir. 1979) ... \xC2" ... See, e.g., Denson v. Donald J. Trump for Pres., ... Inc., 530 F.Supp.3d ... ...
-
Adler v. Penn Credit Corp.
...be taken to be true. Lujan, 504 U.S. at 561 (first alteration in original); see also Denson v. Donald J. Trump for President, Inc., 530 F.Supp.3d 412, 425 (S.D.N.Y. 2021) (same). In other words, “each element must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears......