Federal District Court in Chicago on Wednesday denied Arthur J. Gallagher’s request for a temporary restraining order against Alliant Insurance Services Inc. in connection with the poaching dispute Gallagher filed because eight of its Chicago employees left him.
The lawsuit was filed Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. v. Alliant Insurance Services Inc. on July 28 said that on July 11, three Gallagher employees resigned, followed by five more Gallagher employees in the following days. It charges that Alliant immediately began soliciting the departing employee’s clients.
Gallagher filed a two-page emergency motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction the same day it filed its lawsuit, saying it “has suffered and will suffer irreparable harm if Alliant is not enjoined.”
;A 36-page opposition to Gallagher’s motion, filed with the court on Aug. 3, says the employees who left, all of whom were women, did so because they “became so fed up with Gallagher’s sexist and unfair treatment.”
The motion says that to obtain a TRO, Gallagher must show a likelihood of success on the merits, but its brief “falls short of any factual evidence” that the departing employees “engaged in misconduct and that Alliant is liable.”
It also states that “Gallagher’s requested relief is inappropriately broad.”
Gallagher responded on August 5 by stating that Alliant’s allegations of sexism and discrimination are false and “completely irrelevant,” and that they have demonstrated “a high likelihood of success on the merits.”
In her brief remarks, Judge Martha M. Pacold said she denied Gallagher’s motion for a TRO “for the reasons set forth in the record,” and ordered the parties to file a joint status report on expedited discovery by Friday.
Source link
