Essay Preview: Ms.
Report this essay
Riordan Manufacturing Bio:
Riordan Manufacturing (Riordan) is an international plastics manufacturer. Riordan was founded by Dr. Michael Riordan, a professor of chemistry, in 1992. Riordans Headquarters is in San Jose, California. The company currently has two domestic manufacturing plants, one in Albany, Georgia, and one in Pontiac, Michigan. In the spring of 2000 Riordan opened its first international manufacturing plant in Hangzhou, China. Riordan employs 550 people across the globe with projected earnings of $46 million dollars.
Riordans diverse product line includes the manufacturing of plastic bottles, fans, heart valves, medical stents, and custom plastic parts. Riordans existing clients are automotive parts manufacturers, aircraft manufacturers, the Department of Defense, beverage makers and bottlers, and medical distributors.
Cause For Litigation:
An international bioethics related legal issue has arisen out of Riordans recent development of a genetically engineered heart valve. This heart valve is a revolutionary hybrid design consisting of a newly developed substrate called bio-plastics. Bio-plastics are created using human stem cells that are infused with a plastics-based gel that provides a semi-rigid structural framework which supports the living tissue.
This newly patented process of creating bio-plastic heart valves has yet to receive the required Food and Drug Administrations (FDA) clearance in the United States. Riordan has a long history of being an aggressive company who takes calculated risks to bring new products to market. These two factors have contributed to Riordans decision to release this new product in China, which does not require the rigorous testing and scrutiny of the FDA.
Everything seemed to be going well until Jimmy Dupont, a Riordan Geneticist, was summarily fired after the companys internal security chief compiled a comprehensive dossier which Riordan claims is evidence of Mr. Duponts “subversive activities.” In response to his termination Mr. Dupont filed a wrongful termination lawsuit. More specifically, Mr. Dupont asserts this so called dossier was compiled by way of illegal wire taps on his office phone and secret video tapes of his meetings with Riordan clients. While Riordan appears to have found a way around the FDA to market its controversial medical devices in foreign countries it is now facing a costly court battle over its development of an alleged internal spy network.
Constitutional Issues:
Does the dossier compiled by Riordan constitute a breach of Mr. Duponts constitutionally protected right to privacy? Does Mr. Dupont have a constitutionally protected right to free speech in the workplace? Are the recordings of Mr. Duponts voice and image a violation of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution?
Pre-Trial Discovery:
During the pre-trial discovery phase of this formal legal complaint Mr. Duponts council submitted interrogatories to Riordan. “Interrogatories are written questions submitted by one party to a lawsuit to another party (Yates et al, 2005, p. 37). Mr. Duponts council made specific inquiries into the nature of the voice and video recordings compiled in the dossier. The interrogatory also specifically asked if Riordan had any written disclosure statements that would have made their client aware that he might be subjected to these types of clandestine recordings.
Mr. Duponts council also requested for the production of documents. “One party to a lawsuit may request that the other party produce all documents that are relevant to the case prior to trial. This is called production of documents” (Yates et al, 2005, p. 37). In this case, Mr. Duponts council requested all documents that are connected to Riordans assertion that Mr. Dupont was acting in a subversive manner.
Riordans Answer:
Riordans legal staff answered Mr. Duponts interrogatories and request for the production of documents in a timely manner. They provided copies of the voice and video recordings of Mr. Duponts various meetings with Riordan clients. They also produced a signed copy of Mr. Duponts employment application which contained an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Clause. This ADR Clause guaranteed Riordan the right to handle, any and all, employment disputes by means of ADR and binding arbitration, rather than through the court system. In addition, the State of Georgia happens to be a Right to Work State. This means that Riordan can dismiss any employee without cause. Finally, the employment application also contained an Employee Surveillance Disclosure Statement (ESDS). The ESDS was signed by Mr. Dupont on the date of his original employment application. Riordans astute legal staff also reaffirmed that Riordan is a private employer and therefore Mr. Duponts constitutional rights could not have been violated.
Motion