Dallas Bar Association
HEADNOTES November 2010 Volume 34 Number 11
Haynes and Boone: Pro Bono Firm of the Year by Rob Ramage
The Dallas Volunteer Attorney Program (DVAP) presented the Dallas Office of Haynes and Boone LLP with the Pro Bono Law Firm of the Year Award at the annual awards reception October 28. Each year, DVAP, a joint project of the Dallas Bar Association and Legal Aid of Northwest Texas, honors the lawyers, judges and other legal professionals who donate pro bono services. This year, the award for Pro Bono Law Firm of the Year was given to the Dallas Office of Haynes and Boone. Haynes and Boone has made a firmwide commitment to providing pro bono services not only here in Dallas, but also nationwide, proving their motto of “serving the common good where we live and practice” to be a reality. Serving the local Dallas community, as well as others, is not a new concept at Haynes and Boone as their Pro Bono/Public Service Committee was formed nearly 20 years ago. In 2010, Haynes and Boone donated nearly 1,500 hours of pro bono services to DVAP clients, and numerous partners and associates in the firm’s Dallas office participated in the program by staffing clients or taking cases. Haynes and Boone partner Jonathan Wilson said that “providing pro bono services to our community and those in need is something very important to us here at Haynes and Boone.” Mr. Wilson added that “providing pro bono legal services is encouraged at all levels throughout Haynes and Boone and is something we are honored to do.” At Haynes and Boone, each attorney is encouraged to aspire to at least 50 hours of pro bono legal service per year, reporting them in the same fashion as they report billable hours. Obtaining 17,500 pro bono hours annually is a testament to the commitment that Haynes and
Focus
Boone has made to providing pro bono services. Pro Bono matters undertaken by Haynes and Boone have been as diverse as society’s needs and consist of: helping abused and neglected children, death penalty cases, assisting indigent clients with matters involving family violence, landlord tenant litigation, estate matters, seekers of political asylum who face violence or death if they return to their home countries, and assisting with the diverse legal needs of many fine charitable causes and shelters. Haynes and Boone is also a very active participant in the East Clinic where they routinely screen candidates for pro bono services, provide legal guidance and accept pro bono cases as needed. Haynes and Boone recently paired up with the in-house legal department at American Airlines to support DVAP and to increase and enhance pro bono services in Dallas. After conducting an in-house training session, Haynes and Boone enlisted more than 30 volunteer attorneys and accepted 17 cases. In addition to Haynes and Boone’s pro bono work with DVAP, the firm is also involved in other pro bono activities throughout Dallas, including Camp Fire U.S.A., Goodwill Industries of Dallas, Human Rights Initiative of North Texas, Justice for Children, Kids in Need of Defense, National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, Promise House, State Bar of Texas Access to Justice Commission and Volunteer Legal Services of Central Texas. DVAP congratulates Haynes and Boone as the 2010 Pro Bono Firm of the Year and thanks each and every one of its attorneys for their service and commitment to providing these pro HN bono services. Rob Ramage is a Member of the Dallas Office of Dykema Gossett. He can be reached at RRamage@dykema.com.
Focus Intellectual Property Law
Pro Bono Lawyer of the Year: Sean M. Whyte, Jones Day by Jessica D. Smith
Sean M. Whyte, an associate at Jones Day, was presented the Dallas Volunteer Attorney Program (DVAP) Pro Bono Lawyer of the Year Award at the annual awards reception October 28. Mr. Whyte donated more than 700 hours to the Dallas Volunteer Attorney Program during a 12-month period. A 2004 graduate of The University of Texas at Austin Law School, Mr. Whyte practices general civil litigation and has assisted in the defense of clients in toxic tort, intellectual property and securities cases in state and federal courts. He also has significant class action experience, having participated in the defense of several class actions in federal courts throughout the country. Before joining Jones Day, Mr. Whyte completed all of the course requirements for a doctoral degree in philosophy and taught at several small colleges in Michigan and Ohio. In 2009, Mr. Whyte served as Jones Day’s second attorney to participate in the Lend-A-Lawyer program, which is a unique program in which a firm commits to pay one associate attorney’s normal salary and benefits while that attorney works in-house for the Dallas Volunteer Attorney Program. He worked on matters including contract disputes, divorces, SAPCRs, consumer matters and landlord/tenant disputes. According to coworkers at DVAP, Mr. Whyte was always willing to step up and help out, particularly in cases with deadlines quickly approaching where they would have had extreme difficulty finding another pro bono lawyer willing to accept the case. He even took one of the pro bono consumer cases all the way through
a jury trial in Justice Court in 2009, working under severe time pressure. As part of the Lend-A-Lawyer program, Mr. Whyte said he “enjoyed being able to level the playing field for people who were previously pro se in cases where the opponent had counsel. [Pro bono work] is a great opportunity to grow as a lawyer.” Mr. Whyte is one of the founding members of the Jones Day Dallas Associate Pro Bono Committee. This committee has partnered with several of the pro bono service providers in Dallas, including the Dallas Volunteer Sean M. Whyte Attorney Program and Legal Aid of NorthWest Texas, to help staff emergency pro bono cases with Jones Day partners and associates. “In addition to being a fine lawyer and committed to pro bono, Sean is a delightful person who has been an excellent ambassador for Jones Day, DVAP and pro bono overall,” said DBA President Ike Vanden Eykel. Mr. Whyte has helped staff legal clinics and has assisted in the representation of DVAP clients, as well as Jones Day pro bono clients, since he began practicing law in 2004. He has also participated in numerous DVAP clinics, including South Dallas, East Dallas, Garland and HN the Wills Clinic. For more information about DVAP or pro bono opportunities, visit www.dallasvolunteerattorneyprogram.org or contact Alicia Hernandez at ahernandez@dallasbar.org. Jessica D. Smith is the DBA’s Communications/Media Director. She can be reached at jsmith@dallasbar.org.
Intellectual Property Law
Using a Residuals Clause In a Nondisclosure Agreement by Jonathan K. Hustis
Your client wants to look at confidential information from a prospective business partner or acquisition target and has been asked to sign a nondisclosure agreement. Before you sign and receive any confidential information, why should you consider using a “residuals clause” and other measures to protect your client?
Background: The Risk of Contamination
The review of another company’s secrets may contaminate your client’s reviewing employees and inhibit its ability to use them on future assignments. That may impact
your plans to move into markets where the disclosing party also intends to operate. Here’s why. In trade secret and employment law, courts have permitted claims where former employers have used the doctrines of “misappropriation by memory” and of “inevitable disclosure” to seek injunctive relief against an employee who had gone to work for a competitor. The most prominent recent lawsuit advancing this theory was reported this month in the September 7 The New York Times. Reporting on HP’s California lawsuit against its former CEO Mark Hurd, the Times said that “[t]he suit accused Mr. Hurd of violating his severance agreement to protect HP’s confidential information by taking a job as co-president of Oracle,
Inside 5 IP Due Diligence in Mergers & Acquisitions 8 DBA Salutes Veterans 11 Intellectual Property in Corporate Transactions 13 Trademark Basics for Small Businesses—Common Pitfalls
an HP rival and partner.” In these cases the claimants allege that the former employee has necessarily retained trade secrets in memory and that the former employee cannot help but employ that information in his or her new position with the competitor. The same concepts logically apply to the situation where a receiving company returns or destroys the confidential information in tangible, written form, but then uses its same employees who reviewed that information in competition against the disclosing company. The disclosing party may claim that by using these employees in a competitive activity, the receiving continued on page 12