Sybron Corp. v. Wetzel
In this dissenting opinion, Justice Wachtler argues against the majority's decision regarding long-arm jurisdiction over De Dietrich, a New Jersey corporation. He contends that the mere hiring of a former employee (Wetzel) by De Dietrich, even with an inferred intent to obtain Sybron's trade secrets, does not constitute a "tortious act" required by CPLR 302 (subd [a], par 3) for establishing jurisdiction, especially without actual disclosure or use of trade secrets. Wachtler emphasizes the delicate balance between protecting trade secrets and ensuring employee mobility and fair competition. He warns that the majority's interpretation could create an overly broad cause of action, impeding skilled workers' ability to change employers. Consequently, he advocates for affirming the Appellate Division's dismissal of the suit against De Dietrich for lack of jurisdiction.