Full docket text for document 65: Judge Joseph L. Tauro: ORDER entered. After a Scheduling Conference held on 12/7/2010, this court hereby orders that: Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Defendant's Amended Counterclaims [53] is DENIED.BTU (Plaintiff) had filed a motion to dismiss Betancourt's counterclaims (they did not challenge the Federal and State wiretap claims). ALL six claims by Betancourt against Ventures and/or Al Mazeedi are moving forward in US Federal Court and are listed below.
Misrepresentation (Against Ventures and Al Mazeedi)
- Misrepresentation (Against Ventures and Al Mazeedi)
- Wrongful Termination (Against Ventures)
- Abuse of Process (Against Ventures and Al Mazeedi)
- Intentional Interference With Advantageous Relations (Against Al Mazeedi)
- Violation of Massachusetts Wiretap Statute G.L.c.272 Section 99 (Against Ventures and Al Mazeedi)
- Violation of Federal Wiretapping Statute 42 U.S.C. Section 2510 et. seq. (Against Ventures and Al Mazeedi)
Introduction section from the document filed in US District Court:
These counterclaims are brought by Martin Betancourt, ("Betancourt") a former executive with the defendant corporation, which was in the business of providing services to investment funds that aggregated the capital of foreign investors for investment in power plants outside the United States. In the course of his employment, Betancourt detected apparent criminal fraud by his employer, and, as a whistleblower, shared documents evidencing such fraud to counsel for plaintiff investors suing his employer. As a result of his whistleblowing disclosures, Betancourt's employment was terminated and he was sued in this Court. He brings counterclaims against his former employer and its chairman/chief executive officer under Massachusetts common law. Further, during the course of employment, Betancourt, became suspicious that his employer and/or chief executive officer were illegally wiretapping/intercepting his conversations (and the conversations of others) through the use of a listening device planted in his office. Recently, evidence to support such suspicions [sic] has come to light (see linked filing from US District Court, pages 2 and 3) in the form of video surveillance footage and eyewitness testimony which reveals that such a listening/wiretapping device was placed in his office during the course of his employment.Link: DEFENDANT MARTIN BETANCOURT's AMENDED COUNTERCLAIMS AND THIRD PARTY CLAIM
3 comments:
Local energy firms sue former IT manager to recover data
An energy investment company and an affiliate have sued their former head of information technology and data security, alleging the one-time employee is refusing to return “highly confidential internal company data” unless he gets a “substantially larger severance payment.”
BTU Ventures Inc. and BTU Industries Holdings, both of Waltham, Mass., argue in their suit that former employee Brian Murphy, also of Waltham, “intends to disseminate the company’s confidential and proprietary information to third parties unless BTU accedes to his demands.”
They argue that among other things Murphy violated the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act in taking its backup files.
BTU Ventures and BTU Industries are related to a Cayman Islands company and maintain funds that invest in power plants in the Middle East and North Africa.
BTU is seeking a court order requiring Murphy to return the materials.
Murphy could not be reached for comment.
link: http://boston.bizjournals.com/boston/stories/2010/01/04/daily75.html
So Murphy had videos that they want back and needs 7 lawyers to get them back? Seems like a big waste of time and money, but it appears to be the Al-Mazeedi tag line.
They think Mr. Betancourt cannot sue Mr. Al-Mazeedi and Ms. Christina Stephens without these video CDs?
I cannot wait until Murphy gets his day in court.
The Mole
Why didn't their Press Release to the Boston Business Journal say anything about Mr. Murphy having the only copies of "preparations to conduct illegal audio surveillance of Martin Betancourt." (From Murphy's laywer's filing above)?
Mr. Betancourt's lawyer(s) should do a deposition of Murphy to get a copy from the courts, this video and exactly what else Murphy knows about the inner circle of Mr. Al-Mazeedi after Betancourt's lay-off.
Post a Comment