Guess who is getting fired in this story

[pauldun170]

Price to PepsiCo for Not Being in Court: $1.26 Billion



What's the cost of not showing up to court? For PepsiCo Inc., it's a $1.26 billion default judgment. A Wisconsin state court socked the company with the monster award in a case alleging that PepsiCo stole the idea to bottle and sell purified water from two Wisconsin men.

Now the company is scrambling to salvage the situation. The damages award was handed down on Sept. 30. PepsiCo filed motions to vacate the order and dismiss the claims on Oct. 13, saying it wasn't even aware of the lawsuit until Oct. 6.

The litigation began in April when Charles Joyce and James Voigt sued the soft drink maker and two of its distributors, alleging they had misappropriated trade secrets from confidential discussions the plaintiffs had with the distributors in 1981 about selling purified water. The information was illicitly passed to PepsiCo, which used it to develop and sell Aquafina bottled water, the plaintiffs allege in the case filed in the Circuit Court of Jefferson County before Judge Jacqueline Erwin.

In court documents, PepsiCo argues it was improperly served with the Wisconsin lawsuit in North Carolina, but also asks the court to excuse the corporate bureaucracy that buried a legal document for weeks. While plaintiffs say they served the lawsuit in June on PepsiCo's registered agent in North Carolina, where the company is incorporated, PepsiCo says its law department at the company's Purchase, N.Y.-based headquarters was not notified until September.

"The bottom line is there was a defect in the process for us, but also for" the plaintiffs, said PepsiCo spokesman Joe Jacuzzi, who called the case "highly dubious."

Robert Roth, a lawyer for PepsiCo at Menomonee, Wis.-based Niebler, Pyzyk, Roth & Carrig, couldn't be reached for comment. Another lawyer for PepsiCo, Dean Panos, a partner at Chicago-based Jenner & Block, declined to comment.

In court papers, PepsiCo claims it first received a legal document related to the case from the North Carolina agent on Sept. 15 when a copy of a co-defendant's letter was forwarded to Deputy General Counsel Tom Tamoney in PepsiCo's law department. Tamoney's secretary, Kathy Henry, put the letter aside and didn't tell anyone about it because she was "so busy preparing for a board meeting," PepsiCo said in its Oct. 13 motion to vacate.

When Henry received a forwarded copy of the plaintiff's motion for default judgment on Oct. 5, she sent that to Yvonne Mazza, a legal assistant for Aquafina matters. Remembering that she still had the other document, Henry passed it to Mazza too. The next day Mazza sent the documents to David Wexler, a department attorney, and he "immediately" called the agent to get a copy of the complaint.

Lawyers for PepsiCo distributors Wis-Pak Inc. and Carolina Canners Inc. made court appearances in June and July. PepsiCo was at a loss to explain why it hadn't heard about the case from them. "It's just another unfortunate thing that didn't come together," Jacuzzi said.

In seeking to dismiss the case, PepsiCo argues that the statute of limitations should preclude the lawsuit, brought 15 years after the company started selling Aquafina and more than two decades after the alleged confidential talks. Moreover, "the $1.26 billion judgment that has been entered is unprecedented in size and justice requires that PepsiCo have a chance to defend itself," the company said.

The lead plaintiffs lawyer, David Van Dyke of Chicago-based Cassiday Schade, said Wisconsin courts have been "pretty clear that they don't like" vacating default judgments. "There is a possibly that a judge may say we're going to litigate the damages aspect of it," Van Dyke said.

A hearing is scheduled for Nov. 6.

[shmike]

Pepsi-Co to Judge:
"We didn't open the mail, can we get a do-over?"

Fuck 'em, I prefer Coke anyway.

[Kaneman]

My buddy works for Pepsi and has for a couple years. They actually fire people for drinking Coke products on company property.

[askmrjesus]

Originally Posted by Kaneman

My buddy works for Pepsi and has for a couple years. They actually fire people for drinking Coke products on company property.

That's no joke. Cola wars are serious business.

I worked on a gig for Pepsi around 1986. They spent a million dollars to rent a sound stage at Universal, and put on a show for all the international distributors. They flew these guys in from all over the planet, so they could watch a preview of the new Pepsi commercial (starring Fred Savage!) and see the unveiling of the new Pepsi machine and the new bottle.

The was a meeting with the suits on day one. Absolutely no mention of Coke was allowed on set. Period. If you came in with a bag from McDonald's, (coke users), you were to be fired. No appeals. They gave the crew three fucking pallets of Pepsi stuff to drink for the week, so, no excuses.

The next day, one of my crew comes in wearing his favorite "Cocaine" t-shirt,
(the one the had the word cocaine morphed into a Coke-a-Cola logo). The suits went ballistic, and I had to fire the guy.

JC

[RACER X]

i think the beer co's are that serious too.

[Kaneman]

Yet that would be completely unheard of in the auto industry. I.E., you work for Ford but drive a Chevy to work.

[shmike]

Originally Posted by Kaneman

Yet that would be completely unheard of in the auto industry. I.E., you work for Ford but drive a Chevy to work.

Think again.

Try being UAW and driving a Toyota to work.

[askmrjesus]

I drove by a Ford plant in Cleveland a couple of years ago. There was separate parking for imports, (farther away from the building).

JC

[Kaneman]

Originally Posted by shmike

Think again.

Try being UAW and driving a Toyota to work.

No shit? So will they just not hire you if you drive a foreign car not built with union labor or are you expected to trade-in within a certain amount of time.

It was never an issue for me working for Chrysler or Mercedes. They did try to give exclusive up close parking to Mercedes drivers but that got struck down after a few complaints to HR.

Of course I worked for the Financial arm and not Motors so its like a much different culture for the UAW and those who put the cars together.

[shmike]

Originally Posted by Kaneman

No shit? So will they just not hire you if you drive a foreign car not built with union labor or are you expected to trade-in within a certain amount of time.

It was never an issue for me working for Chrysler or Mercedes. They did try to give exclusive up close parking to Mercedes drivers but that got struck down after a few complaints to HR.

Of course I worked for the Financial arm and not Motors so its like a much different culture for the UAW and those who put the cars together.

Honestly, I'm not sure if they wouldn't hire you. It would make for an uncomfortable work environment though.

I do know that my friend's dad is UAW. They have a Corolla at the Florida house.

Dad keeps an old POS at home because he "wouldn't be caught dead" driving a Jap car to the plant.