IANAL, but a lot probably depends on exactly how it's done. Was the previous contract, and all consideration attached to it, truly severed at some point? Was th

IANAL, but a lot probably depends on exactly how it's done. Was the previous contract, and all consideration attached to it, truly severed at some point? Was there a period, however brief, when the employee was cut off from company facilities and equipment? Was there an explicit offer/acceptance of the new employment, conducted as other offers customarily are at that company? Were any arrangements regarding things like benefit carryovers the same as those available to others, not specially made up for the acquisition case? Were any promises made as part of the acquisition itself regarding retention or compensation? I can easily imagine that one set of answers might lead a judge to believe the firing/rehiring was legitimate, and another set of answers leading them to believe otherwise. Law follows its own rules, not common sense.