ILNews

BrightPoint settles 2 suits against rival Brightstar

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indianapolis-based BrightPoint Inc. has agreed to settle two lawsuits it brought against similarly named rival Brightstar Corp.

BrightPoint, which agreed on July 2 to be acquired by California-based Ingram Micro Inc. for about $840 million, filed the complaints against Miami-based Brightstar in December.

Both suits involved former Brightpoint executives hired by Brightstar who had access to the local firm’s innermost workings and strategies.

The lawsuits, filed in Marion Superior Court, were dismissed Wednesday. Lawyers for both sides declined to comment on the settlements, citing confidentiality agreements.

In one case, BrightPoint alleged that Miljan Milan, who served as general manager for Latin America before leaving the company in April 2011, flagrantly violated the non-compete provision of his employment agreement when he accepted a senior post with Brightstar.

BrightPoint sought an injunction against the company and Milan. The suit alleged breach of contract, breach of Indiana’s uniform trade secrets act, and tortious interference.

“Milan is in a position where the use of BrightPoint’s trade secrets will permit Milan and Brightstar to deploy an unfair competitive advantage in bidding for business against BrightPoint,” the suit alleged.

In the other suit, BrightPoint sued Brightstar over its hiring of Mitch Black, a former senior vice president in charge of BrightPoint’s North American distribution division.

Black had worked at BrightPoint for a dozen years when he left in November 2010 to become president of sales and purchasing at PCS Wireless Inc., a New Jersey firm BrightPoint did not consider a direct competitor. But less than a year later, he began discussions about returning to BrightPoint and also said he had “a very compelling offer” from another company he did not identify, according to the suit.

The BrightPoint discussions were just a ruse to extract additional confidential information Black could use against the company when he joined Brightstar, according to the suit.

In May, a Marion Superior Court judge dismissed a fraud charge against Black.

“BrightPoint is attempting to sustain a claim for fraud against Mr. Black, seeking excessive damages and fees, by attributing to Mr. Black a false statement contained in an unsigned document, which BrightPoint drafted,” lawyers for Brightstar said in their motion to dismiss.

The two firms are global heavyweights in the wireless phone industry. BrightPoint has 3,900 employees and posted 2011 revenue $5.2 billion, while Brightstar has 3,400 employees and had $5.7 billion in revenue last year.

Ingram’s acquisition of BrightPoint is expected to be completed in the third quarter.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I'm not sure what's more depressing: the fact that people would pay $35,000 per year to attend an unaccredited law school, or the fact that the same people "are hanging in there and willing to follow the dean’s lead in going forward" after the same school fails to gain accreditation, rendering their $70,000 and counting education worthless. Maybe it's a good thing these people can't sit for the bar.

  2. Such is not uncommon on law school startups. Students and faculty should tap Bruce Green, city attorney of Lufkin, Texas. He led a group of studnets and faculty and sued the ABA as a law student. He knows the ropes, has advised other law school startups. Very astute and principled attorney of unpopular clients, at least in his past, before Lufkin tapped him to run their show.

  3. Not that having the appellate records on Odyssey won't be welcome or useful, but I would rather they first bring in the stray counties that aren't yet connected on the trial court level.

  4. Aristotle said 350 bc: "The most hated sort, and with the greatest reason, is usury, which makes a gain out of money itself, and not from the natural object of it. For money was intended to be used in exchange, but not to increase at interest. And this term interest, which means the birth of money from money, is applied to the breeding of money because the offspring resembles the parent. Wherefore of an modes of getting wealth this is the most unnatural.

  5. Oh yes, lifetime tenure. The Founders gave that to the federal judges .... at that time no federal district courts existed .... so we are talking the Supreme Court justices only in context ....so that they could rule against traditional marriage and for the other pet projects of the sixties generation. Right. Hmmmm, but I must admit, there is something from that time frame that seems to recommend itself in this context ..... on yes, from a document the Founders penned in 1776: " He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good."

ADVERTISEMENT