Lawwly

Procter & Gamble Co. v. Stoneham

Ohio Court of Appeals

747 N.E.2d 268 (2000)

Relevant factsFree

Senior manager Paul Stoneham (defendant) had extensive access to Procter & Gamble's (plaintiff) confidential hair-conditioning product plans, including a confidential ten-year marketing strategy, and had signed a noncompete agreement in exchange for stock options; after 13 years he left for a competing role at Alberto-Culver, and the trial court dismissed P&G's suit to enforce the noncompete, finding no enforceable agreement and no showing Stoneham had access to trade secrets.

IssueFree

Whether, if an employee has access to trade secrets, an employer may use a noncompete agreement to protect those trade secrets.

Unlock the full brief

Free accounts read 20 full briefs. No card required.