TEKsystems, Inc. v. Link et al

Filing 41

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 28 MOTION to Dismiss :Defendant Jacobson Staffing, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendant Jacobson Staffing, Inc. motion is DENIED. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 6/10/13. (LGK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
TEKSYSTEMS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JONATHAN J. LINK and
JACOBSON STAFFING, INC.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:13 CV 146 RWS

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendant Jonathan Link is a former employee of Plaintiff TEKsystems, Inc. As an
employee of TEKsystems, Link entered an employment agreement which contains non-compete,
non-solicit, and non-disclosure provisions. After his termination of employment with
TEKsystems, Link became an employee of Defendant Jacobson Staffing, Inc., a direct competitor
of TEKsystems. TEKsystems filed this case asserting breach of contract, equitable accounting,
and misappropriation of trade secrets claims against Link. In addition, TEKsystems asserted a
tortious interference with a contract claim against Jacobson. Jacobson has filed a motion to
dismiss arguing that TEKsystems failed to plead sufficient facts to state an interference with a
contract claim. Because I find that TEKsystems has plead sufficient facts to state a claim, I will
deny Jacobson’s motion to dismiss.
In ruling on a motion to dismiss, I must accept as true all factual allegations in the
complaint and view them in the light most favorable to Plaintiff. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6);
Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007). An action fails to state a claim upon which relief
can be granted if it does not plead “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its
face.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). A “plaintiff’s obligation to
provide the grounds of his entitlement to relief requires more than labels and conclusions, and a

formalistic recitation of elements of a cause of action will not do.” Id. (internal quotations
ommitted). To survive a motion to dismiss a plaintiff’s factual allegations “must be enough to
raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Id. at 555. Federal courts employ notice
pleading. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 requires only “a short and plain statement of the
claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). The Rule also
mandates that pleadings “must be construed so as to do justice.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(e).
The elements a party must prove to establish a tortious interference with a contract claim
are: 1) the existence of a contract; (2) defendant's knowledge of the contract; (3) intentional
interference by the defendant inducing or causing a breach of the contract; (4) absence of
justification; and (5) damages resulting from defendant's conduct. Western Blue Print Co., LLC
v. Roberts, 367 S.W.3d 7, 19 (Mo. 2012).
In its complaint, TEKsystems has alleged that it has an employment contract with Link
which Jacobson is aware and that Jacobson is intentionally interfering with the contract, without
justification, through its continued employment of Link to TEKsystems’ damage. Having
considered TEKsystems’ complaint as a whole, I find that the complaint states sufficient facts to
put Jacobson on notice of the claim against it. As a result, I will deny Jacobson’s motion to
dismiss.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Jacobson Staffing, Inc.’s motion to dismiss
[#28] is DENIED.

____________________________
RODNEY W. SIPPEL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 10th day of June, 2013.

-2-