2011 | The Law Offices of Gregory D. Jordan - Part 2

Enforceability of Noncompete Agreement Raised in Texas Hair Salon Lawsuit

An appeals decision in the Fifth District Court in Dallas, Texas shows that employees who have at-will status can still be subject to noncompete employment agreements. The appeals court decided in late May that a trial court had erroneously thrown out the case of the Jon Scott Salon, Inc. v. Jacalyn Garcia and Lindsey Gresham. Garcia and Gresham worked for the Jon Scott Salon and in their employment agreements had signed that they would not directly or inadvertently market to the salon’s customers within a 10-mile radius for one year when they left the company.

When these two hair stylists and cosmetologists terminated their employment on April 13, 2010, they started a new salon within the off-limit radius. Jon Scott allegedly started to get an extraordinary amount of no-show appointments and cancellations. At the original trial, Jon Scott claimed breach of contract, misappropriation of trade secrets and confidential information, theft, conversion, and breach of fiduciary duty. The trial judge threw out the case due to their at-will employment, but in the appellate court, the judge said that status does not bar their employment contract responsibilities. The lawsuit will now go back to the trial court to decide if the hair stylists violated the noncompete agreement.

The appellant opinion stated that, “…once the employer fulfills the promise to divulge the confidential information, the contract becomes enforceable and may support a covenant not to compete.” By signing the documents and using the salon for, “…opportunities and resources to develop contacts and goodwill, they agreed to refrain from using the goodwill for the benefit of any person or entity other than appellant [Jon Scott Salon].”

In a personal-service industry such as a hair salon, non-compete agreements can be vital to the business’ success, especially with the high employee turnover that the industry has. It’s not just high-paid technology, sales, or CEO positions that may warrant these types of agreements to safeguard a company’s client base, and marketing and sales tactics. Texas law on noncompete agreements has changed dramatically over the years, and courts look to numerous factors to determine enforceability.

Disputes involving noncompete agreements can be complex, so having a knowledgeable business attorney on your side – whether you are a business owner, individual, or employee – is advised.

Austin noncompete attorney, Austin business attorney and Austin business litigation attorney Gregory D. Jordan has more than 20 years of experience working on behalf of individuals and businesses in many diverse industries. He can help answer questions about the enforceability of these agreements and what conduct is allowed under a noncompete agreement. To learn more, please contact Austin noncompete lawyer and Austin business litigation attorney Gregory D. Jordan at https://www.theaustintriallawyer.com or call (512) 419-0684.

Gregory D. Jordan is an Austin business attorney, Austin employment lawyer, and Austin business litigation lawyer. To learn more, visit Theaustintriallawyer.com.

The Latest in Texas Food Truck Legal and Operational News

El Paso, Texas recently eased regulations against mobile food vendors after four food truck owners represented by litigators at the Institute of Justice filed a lawsuit against the city challenging the constitutionality of the city’s mobile vending restrictions. El Paso ordinances had previously made it illegal for food trucks to be within 1,000 feet of a restaurant or convenience store.

The federal lawsuit of Castaneda v. the City of El Paso asserted that food truck vendors’ constitutional right to “earn an honest living free from unreasonable and arbitrary government interference” was violated. The City of El Paso was stifling competition, a basic principle of capitalism, they said. The Institute of Justice initiated this lawsuit as part of their National Street Vending Initiative to uphold the rights of street vendors everywhere to run their businesses.

“Using government power to place burdensome restrictions on street vendors in order to protect brick-and-mortar businesses from competition is not a valid use of the government’s police power,” said Arif Panju, an attorney at the Institute for Justice Texas Chapter.

El Paso’s food truck vendors can now sell almost anywhere and are now permitted to park curbside during breakfast, lunch, or dinner rush times. Beforehand, they were only allowed to park if customers were already present and had to drive away when no one was flagging them down. “All I want to do is work,” said Maria Robledo, one of the plaintiffs, who has had her food truck business for 13 years in the city. “I am happy that the city is not going to stop me from running my business.”

In most cities, food trucks must pay sales tax, pay fees and obtain permits to be a street vendor, and pass fire department inspections as well as health department inspections. In Austin, Texas, where a thriving food truck scene exists, the city recently tightened its rules, requiring food trucks to even file their truck routes. Food trucks are a booming industry in Austin, with an estimated 1,620 mobile food vendors expected by the end of 2011. The Economist Magazine states the sentiment of consumers is that, “…trucks offer cheap, often innovative dining. They also permit a degree of whimsy that may seem cloying in a restaurant. Trucks will never supplant restaurants. But so long as money remains tight, they will provide a welcome and increasingly prevalent alternative.”

Food trucks dotted throughout the city sell sandwiches, tacos, barbecue, desserts, and even gourmet and rare foods. Nationally, a food truck chef was named one of the best chefs in the U.S. and even food trucks have earned Zagat ratings. Thus, it is no wonder that these businesses are now more likely to seek legal representation to assert their rights.

Austin restaurant attorney and Austin business litigation attorney Gregory D. Jordan has more than 20 years of experience working on behalf of individuals and businesses in the restaurant industry. He represents clients when disputes arise due to financing and loans, equipment leasing, franchise agreements, supply and distribution agreements, intellectual property rights, noncompete agreements, partnership and joint venture agreements, as well as claims against insurers. To learn more, please contact Austin restaurant attorney, Austin business lawyer and Austin business litigation attorney Gregory D. Jordan at https://www.theaustintriallawyer.com or call (512) 419-0684.

Gregory D. Jordan is an Austin business attorney, Austin employment lawyer, and Austin business litigation lawyer. To learn more, visit Theaustintriallawyer.com.

$39M at Stake in Houston Breach of Contract Dispute

MRO Services, LLC thought it was beginning a great business relationship with the Dresser-Rand Group, Inc. in mid March of this year to market and sell Dresser-Rand’s maintenance agreements and equipment services. Yet little after a month of doing business, Dresser-Rand terminated what was supposed to be a five year exclusive contract. MRO was to earn $35,000 a month for the first year of the agreement as a retainer fee, a commission of up to 5 percent for all maintenance agreements sold, and reimbursement of travel costs as approved by Dresser-Rand’s budget.

When MRO was served a letter ending the agreement on April 18, MRO started looking into why Dresser-Rand terminated the relationship. MRO’s lawsuit and complaint documents in Texas’ 113th District Court allege that the contract ended because Dresser-Rand said that MRO’s founder had acted improperly at a social gathering they hosted. MRO says this is “bogus” and alleges that Dresser-Rand wrongfully ended the contract and owes it $38.9 million in damages.

MRO focuses on technical and service-related risk management products for power plants and the energy industry. Dresser-Rand’s maintenance products, heavy industrial turbines, and steam turbines were a good fit for MRO’s many energy industry clients.

“Even if these specious allegations were completely true, Dresser-Rand still had no contractual right to terminate the agreement,” the complaint says. Instead, MRO claims Dresser-Rand might have not realized the true cost of the contract, Dresser’s senior personnel might have viewed them as a threat or did not want them to work for a competitor, or wanted to scale back its operations with power plants.

When businesses are faced with complex contract disputes and terminations, it is imperative that they get legal counsel early on. Austin business litigation attorney and Austin breach of contract attorney Gregory D. Jordan understands the importance of resolving business disputes quickly and efficiently. Most business disputes can be settled short of litigation; yet if litigation is the only route, you want a trial attorney that will aggressively pursue and protect your business’ rights.

At the Law Offices of Gregory D. Jordan, Austin business litigation lawyer and Austin breach of contract attorney Gregory D. Jordan has more than 20 years of experience successfully representing businesses and individuals in business contract disputes. To learn more, please contact Austin business attorney Gregory D. Jordan at https://www.theaustintriallawyer.com or call (512) 419-0684.

Gregory D. Jordan is an Austin business attorney, Austin employment lawyer, and Austin business litigation lawyer. To learn more, visit Theaustintriallawyer.com.

Austin Attorney Gregory D. Jordan Advocates Legal Guidance to Lessen the Rollercoaster Ride in the Oil and Gas Industry

Austin, Texas – The leasing, exploration, production, sale and transportation of oil and gas can be a rollercoaster ride filled with booms and busts. Not only do landowners and producers have to deal with fast changing economics, but every week, numerous lawsuits appear in Texas courts and beyond challenging the rights of one party or another. Disputes over leases, royalties, mineral ownership and processing occur frequently. The oil and gas industry can be a white-knuckle ride for those landowners or businesses without proper legal guidance.

“Skilled legal counsel can help you untangle difficult situations,” said Austin oil and gas attorney Gregory D. Jordan. “If you are a mineral owner who is considering signing a lease or you are concerned that an oil company may not be performing as it should on your property, it’s a good idea to talk with knowledgeable legal counsel. The decisions you make about your minerals could impact the remainder of your life.”

Oil and gas law is a unique legal field. Most attorneys have little or no experience with it. When someone is confronted with an issue involving leasing acreage or an oil and gas dispute, it is important for them to know whether their attorney is knowledgeable in this area. Just as you would not go to a podiatrist to perform heart surgery, it might not be in your best interests to seek legal advice on oil and gas matters from an attorney who lacks experience in this area.

“At times, dealing with an oil and gas company can make someone feel like they’re on a rollercoaster,” Jordan said. “A good oil and gas attorney can give his client confidence in going over the bumps. He should be able to intelligently discuss the law in this area so a client can make informed decisions.”

It is helpful if an oil and gas attorney has substantial experience in the oil and gas industry so that he will understand his client’s needs. For example, Jordan notes that he has been involved in the oil and gas industry for more than 30 years, and before obtaining his law degree, he worked as a petroleum landman and petroleum engineer. Since becoming a lawyer he has experience in:
– negotiating oil and gas leases for landowners and oil companies
– representing oil and gas companies and individuals before the Railroad Commission
– working with engineers and other technical experts
– counseling mineral owners and oil companies on their rights and options
– property damage claims
– claims regarding royalty payments
– claims involving purported property development issues
– unitization and pooling disputes
– processing or gathering of oil and gas production complaints

Gregory D. Jordan is an Austin, Texas oil and gas attorney, Austin business litigation lawyer and Austin business attorney. To learn more, please go to https://www.theaustintriallawyer.com or call (512) 419-0684.

Breach of Contract and Unpaid Work at Center of Beaumont Business and Construction Lawsuits

A Texas steel fabricating company alleges breach of contract, misapplication of trust funds, and failure to pay a government bond claim as it tries to collect the money it is owed for work on two Beaumont, Texas elementary schools. Steel Masters worked as the subcontractor under the general contractor Allco. Allco allegedly owes the subcontractor more than $50,000 for the steel erection work it did during construction of the Amelia Elementary and Blanchette Elementary Schools.

The lawsuits in Jefferson County District Court are currently underway. The plaintiff argues that Allco was paid by Beaumont Independent School District (BISD) but Allco never paid Steel Masters. The steel work for Amelia Elementary encompassed the new 93,500 square feet facility. Overall, the total budget from the school district for construction reportedly equaled close to $21 million and it took a little less than two years to complete the entire project.

Separately, at Blanchette Elementary, the facility totals 85,593 square feet and was said to involve a little over $17 million in final construction costs. The Steel Masters lawsuits state that Allco’s owner, T.W. Harrison, misapplied funds. When construction finished, Travelers Insurance issued a payment bond to BISD. This payment is earmarked to protect unpaid subcontractors, but when Steel Masters requested Travelers to pay the $91,745.40 it was owed, the suit alleges Travelers refused to pay it.

Construction payment disputes like Steel Masters’ can be complex. It is critical that a business get expert legal counsel early on to protect their interests. Sometimes a matter must go to litigation like the Steel Masters cases; at other times, legal representation will encourage the opposing party to resolve the matter by mediation and faster financial settlements. Austin business litigation attorney and Austin construction litigation attorney Gregory D. Jordan knows the importance of resolving business disputes quickly and efficiently.

Construction contracts are often lengthy documents with many potential traps for the unwary. Unfortunately, large construction projects often end with disputes or litigation. Likewise, insurance claims related to such projects can be difficult to collect on. Businesses often find they obtain better results when they hire an experienced and qualified business lawyer to pursue these matters for them. At the Law Offices of Gregory D. Jordan, Austin business litigation attorney and Austin construction litigation attorney Gregory D. Jordan has more than 20 years of experience representing businesses and individuals in construction and other business-related disputes. To learn more, please contact Austin business litigation attorney, Austin construction litigation lawyer and Austin business attorney Gregory D. Jordan at https://www.theaustintriallawyer.com or call (512) 419-0684.

Gregory D. Jordan is an Austin business attorney, Austin employment lawyer, and Austin business litigation lawyer. To learn more, visit Theaustintriallawyer.com.

Pharmaceutical Company at the Center of Employment and Whistleblower Lawsuit

Medical device company Conceptus, Inc. is under fire in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas in Houston for firing a worker for complaining about a fellow salesman who was allegedly improperly enticing pharmaceutical clients.

Toby James, the whistleblower, took over Chris Orlaska’s accounts, another salesman at Conceptus. Quickly he discovered that Orlaska was allegedly improperly selling or giving away the devicemaker’s Essure kits and that some physicians were potentially illegally billing Medicaid for the free kits. After speaking with various nurses, James cross-referenced sales reports and asserts he found little data to back up the kits that were in their possession. James indicates he reported the incident to his manager, and ultimately his manager’s boss when no action had been taken. After a meeting with the boss, he says he was encouraged to email the head of human resources regarding the issue.

In a twist of events over a two-week period, James was fired and then sent a harsh letter from a lawyer that Conceptus hired. James maintains that he was protected from retaliation by the False Claims Act, Section 3730, part h, which encourages employees with knowledge of fraud to come forward by prohibiting retaliation against those employees. Section 3730 also includes the entitlement to relief for: “job reinstatement with the same seniority status such employee would have had but for the discrimination, two times the amount of back pay, interest on the back pay, and compensation for any special damages sustained as a result of the discrimination, including litigation costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees.”

The case will be an interesting one to watch unfold as pharmaceutical companies are already in a pressure-cooker situation with numerous reported fraudulent and unethical incidents plaguing the industry. Combine that with wrongdoers who have been accused of making illegitimate Medicaid claims, and it’s a toxic situation.

The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) established a code that outlines best practices for the pharmaceutical industry. “Pharmaceutical company representatives play an important role in delivering accurate, up-to-date information to healthcare professionals about the approved indications, benefits and risks of pharmaceutical therapies,” PhRMA stated in its “Code on Interactions with Healthcare Professionals”. “Company representatives must act with the highest degree of professionalism and integrity.”

Even Conceptus’ Code of Ethics from September 2010 says that, “If you know of or suspect a violation of the Code, feel uncomfortable about a situation or have any doubts about whether it is consistent with the Company’s high ethical standards, seek help.” Conceptus employees must sign an agreement whereby they acknowledge, “I am not aware of any unreported violations of the Code, and agree to report any violations or concerns in the manner described in the Code.”

Is there a double standard? Perhaps. But either way, Mr. James was very wise to seek an attorney to protect his rights.

Oftentimes, the best asset an employee has is independent legal counsel that can bring knowledge of all sides of employment law. Austin employment attorney and Austin whistleblower attorney Gregory D. Jordan has a wide range of experience in employment law and represents both employees and employers in vigorously upholding their rights. With more than 20 years of experience in employment litigation, Jordan has counseled on such topics as wrongful termination, retaliation, discrimination, harassment, whistleblowers, overtime and wage claims, and the Family and Medical Leave Act. To learn more, please go to https://www.theaustintriallawyer.com or call (512) 419-0684.

Gregory D. Jordan is an Austin business attorney, Austin employment lawyer, and Austin business litigation lawyer. To learn more, visit Theaustintriallawyer.com.

Austin Business Litigation Attorney Gregory D. Jordan comments on Texas Shareholder Dispute over $7 Billion Takeunder Merger

Austin, Texas – Breach of fiduciary duties and shareholder disputes take center stage in the class action lawsuit between a Frontier Oil Corporation shareholder and Frontier’s Board of Directors as it tries to merge with the Holly Corporation.

Frontier Oil Corporation and the Holly Corporation have signed a $7 billion agreement to merge to become one of the biggest U.S. oil refiners. Frontier’s shareholder Walter Ryan, Jr. alleges they would become minority shareholders in the new company and the deal is really a takeunder because Holly is buying Frontier for less than its market price.

The complaint slams the merger, alleging that, “Frontier’s shareholders will be permanently and incurably harmed if the proposed transaction is allowed to be consummated.” The dispute includes allegations of preclusive deal protection devices with a no-shop clause that prohibits Frontier from seeking alternative merger offers, an excessive termination fee of $80 million that Holly Corp. will charge if another offer arises, and selling Frontier at a low, unfair price.

As Ryan and apparently some other Frontier shareholders view the dispute, the directors of Frontier have a fiduciary duty to “obtain the highest value reasonably available for the corporation’s shareholders” as well as not to receive financial benefit or “preferential treatment at the expense of public shareholders.”

This lawsuit in the District Court of Harris County, Texas points to the fact that sometimes directors, partners, and shareholders need legal representation to ensure all parties will act reasonably and as promised. “Whether it is a dispute over $7 billion or a few hundred thousand, businesses and partnerships do not always operate smoothly,” said Austin business attorney Gregory D. Jordan. “Counsel must understand business partnerships and shareholder obligations. In a dispute such as this, it is critical to have legal counsel that will effectively and efficiently pursue your best interests. It will be very interesting to see whether the court finds those obligations were breached in this case.”

The Law Offices of Gregory D. Jordan has handled numerous disputes involving partnerships and shareholders. As an Austin shareholder attorney and Austin partnership attorney, Jordan has more than 20 years of experience with businesses in oil and gas production and exploration, medicine and dentistry, restaurants, wholesale products distribution, real estate and property development, sales and retail establishments, airplane sales and leasing, intellectual property licensing, franchises, software development and hardware, and a wealth of other business ventures.

To learn more visit, https://www.theaustintriallawyer.com.

Texas Construction and Drainage Dispute Requires Legal Guidance

Business owners generally expect their neighbors to think about the consequences of their actions before they act. Unfortunately, it appears the neighbors of an apartment complex in Galveston may not have done so.

The owner of Courtyard Apartments is dealing with major water drainage issues and damage since the Dickinson Independent School District (DISD) built the Sam Vitanza stadium and a parking lot next door. The apartment owner, Multi-Family Baker LLC, tried to resolve the problems with pooled water and poor drainage with the school district, its general contractor and architect with no success. They also tried to get DISD to correct damage the construction had allegedly done to its apartment trash area.

“Each [of the Defendants] knew that its failure to construct adequate drainage structures was causing storm water to drain to, and collect and back up in the Courtyard Apartments’ north parking lot,” Multi-Family Baker said.

DISD, Durotech GP LLC, Durotech Inc. and PBK Architects Inc. are now being sued in the 122nd Judicial District Court in Galveston County for not building drainage structures that would have allowed storm water to move northward from the Courtyard Apartments’ north parking area into drainage ditches to the east and west. Damage to the Courtyard Apartments parking areas and asphalt has occurred.

Texas Constitution Article 1, Section 17, “prohibits taking, damaging, destruction, or application of a person’s private property for public use without adequate compensation.” Multi-Family Baker alleges that DISD invaded its property, unreasonably interfered with its operation, and is in violation of the Texas Water Code. The Texas Water Code Section 11.086 states that, “no person may divert or impound the natural flow of surface waters in this state, or permit a diversion or impounding by him to continue, in a manner that damages the property of another by the overflow of the water diverted or impounded.” And, “a person whose property is injured by an overflow of water caused by an unlawful diversion or impounding has remedies at law and in equity and may recover damages occasioned by the overflow.”

Claims of negligence, interference, and trespassing occur in this case, and in many construction lawsuits. When working to resolve these types of claims it is usually advisable to hire an experienced construction attorney. An experienced construction litigation attorney should be able to cut through much of the extraneous material and work to determine the cause of construction-related problems whether they result from design errors or the disregarding of laws, permits, and building standards. This may involve the use of technical experts skilled in specific construction fields. It may also involve the use of economic experts to determine how the construction problems affected the value of the business in the short term, what damages were inflicted, and what funds will be needed to correct the problems.

Austin construction litigation attorney and business litigation attorney Gregory D. Jordan has more than 20 years of experience representing diverse businesses with their construction concerns. He has counseled plaintiffs and defendants, real estate developers, property purchasers, property sellers, homebuilders, homebuyers, property owners, commercial contractors, commercial building owners, homeowners’ associations, condominium builders, condominium buyers, large corporations, small businesses, and individuals. To learn more, please go to https://www.theaustintriallawyer.com or call (512) 419-0684.

Gregory D. Jordan is an Austin business attorney, Austin employment lawyer, and Austin business litigation lawyer. To learn more, visit Theaustintriallawyer.com.

Over $1 Billion Gone in Big Pharma Patent Lawsuit

Four years of ups and downs in the patent infringement dispute between Centocor, a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary, and Abbott Laboratories recently took a huge turn in Abbott’s favor. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that Centocor’s patent claims were invalid and overturned a $1.67 billion verdict against Abbott Laboratories.

The dispute arises because of Abbott’s Humira drug, which produces pharmaceutical antibodies to treat arthritis and other immune conditions. Back in 1991, Centocor submitted a patent application for its drug that contained both a mouse and chimeric antibody. Simultaneously, Abbott pushed to create a fully-human antibody.

Centocor proceeded with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office submitting many continuation-in-part applications, including one in 1994 detailing the chimeric antibody with a mouse variable region. In 1996, Abbott’s patent entailed a “high affinity, neutralizing, A2 specific, fully-human antibody.” By 2002, Abbott was given the green light to market Humira. The patent for Centocor’s distinct chimeric antibody was still being processed in 2002.

The appeals court found that the 1994 CIP did not have a sufficient description about human antibodies or human variable regions to claim patent infringement. “A mere wish or plan for obtaining the claimed invention is not an adequate written description,” the appeal decision stated. Thus Centocor did not have constructive possession of the same patent or key parts of the Abbott patent.

Big pharma is big business. Abbott’s Humira is its best moneymaker with $6.55 billion in worldwide sales last year; Johnson & Johnson’s Remicade stacks up with $4.61 billion. Patent, copyright, and trademark disputes can compromise a business’ profits, marketing, and public relations. Expert legal counsel to ensure a business’ hard work stays in good hands is critical. To protect and help a business flourish, an experienced attorney is recommended early on to ensure patent documents and business proceedings are done properly with respect to the innovation and effort involved.

In Texas, Austin patent attorney and Austin business attorney Gregory D. Jordan has served diverse clients in intellectual property disputes. With an engineering degree and background as well as legal experience in this area, the Law Offices of Gregory D. Jordan represents both intellectual property rights owners and alleged infringers.

Gregory D. Jordan is an Austin business attorney, Austin employment lawyer, and Austin business litigation lawyer. To learn more, visit Theaustintriallawyer.com.

Nurses Win in Hospital Whistleblower Case

Austin whistleblower attorney and business lawyer, Gregory D. Jordan, comments on a recent case involving Winkler County Memorial Hospital staff.

Austin, Texas – A medical doctor who was the subject of a whistleblower complaint recently had an arrest warrant issued for him and was placed on probation by the Texas Medical Board.

In 2009, registered nurses Anne Mitchell and Vickilyn Galle filed an anonymous letter with the Texas Medical Board about their co-worker Dr. Rolando Arafiles, Jr., MD, in regards to what they perceived as patient care issues at Winkler County Memorial Hospital in Kermit, Texas. When the doctor learned about the letter, he had the county sheriff determine who had written it. The nurses were then charged with a third-degree felony alleging misuse of official information. The hospital also fired the nurses. The charge against one of the nurses was dismissed and the other nurse was acquitted at trial. The nurses brought a whistleblower suit against the doctor, the hospital and others which was settled last fall with the agreement that each nurse would be paid $375,000.

The tables have turned and now Dr. Arafiles, Winkler County Sheriff Robert Roberts, Jr., his friend that helped find the nurses who filed the letter, as well as the Winkler County hospital administrator could face criminal charges related to the prosecution and firing of the nurses. The Texas Medical Board has now placed Dr. Arafiles on probation for four years, fined him $5,000, and ordered him to enroll in a remedial medical education program.

Dr. Arafiles was no stranger to the Texas Medical Board as he previously had restrictions placed on his license. Last year, the board charged him with failure to maintain adequate records, overbilling, poor medical judgment, non-therapeutic prescribing, witness intimidation, and other alleged violations.

“This case shows that ultimately nurses who complain about inadequacies in patient care can be vindicated,” said Gregory D. Jordan, Austin whistleblower lawyer. “It is not always easy to blow the whistle on corruption or unsafe practices, but it is the right thing to do. Having an experienced whistleblower attorney in your corner can help protect you.”

An experienced whistleblower lawyer should not only have extensive knowledge in this area, but should also be willing to aggressively prosecute each case and counsel individuals on their rights, options, just compensation, and pertinent laws such as the Texas Whistleblower Act. “A whistleblower attorney must not be afraid to take on the biggest governmental entities or corporations. It’s part of our job,” notes Jordan.

To learn more visit, https://www.theaustintriallawyer.com.

Website by SEO | Law Firm™, an Adviatech Company