3 ms·

The original claim (filed on Jan. 16, 2014) can be found here: https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/fbem/DocumentDisplayServlet?documentId=ydQwzs4EZjDkplRrBmkkwA==&

The original claim (filed on Jan. 16, 2014) can be found here: https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/fbem/DocumentDisplayServlet?documentId=ydQwzs4EZjDkplRrBmkkwA==&system=prod https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/fbem/DocumentDisplayServlet... Sad to see a (implied) partnership end with: "In the most profound treachery and sustained exploitation of friendship, trust and confidence, Hoefler accepted all of the benefits provided by Frere-Jones while repeatedly promising Frere-Jones that he would give him the agreed equity, only to refuse to do so when finally demanded." Earlier discussion on the complaint and the fall-out of the partnership on Quartz (also Jan. 16): http://qz.com/167993/frere-jones-is-suing-hoefler-for-his-half-of-the-worlds-preeminent-digital-type-foundry/ http://qz.com/167993/frere-jones-is-suing-hoefler-for-his-ha...

jacquesm 12y ago
Something similar happened to me when I was young and stupid and I still have a bad feeling about that decades later. This should serve as a warning to anybody in a similar position: promises of shares are worth nothing, if you are in a vesting arrangement make sure you get the actual shares on the promised dates, otherwise you are being taken for a ride, if you are a co-founder and there is no vesting make sure you get your shares right now. Particularly galling here is this paragraph from the linked text: "Update (Jan. 17, 2:45pm ET): HFJ released a statement, set in the firm’s Mercury typeface, denying Frere-Jones’s claims and saying the company will henceforth be known as Hoefler & Co.: " So, as long as you're working without a stake in the company but on vague promises your compensation is limited to your salary + having your name as an equal partner on the company letterhead but as soon as you so much as try to enforce your rights you're being removed as if you never existed. Classy. I sincerely hope that this suit will be resolved amicably, and if it isn't that the firm will be named Frere-Jones Inc. when they're done. Hoefler is going to have a hard time arguing that Frere-Jones was only in the masthead for decorative purposes, it certainly seems to spread the message that Frere-Jones is to be considered a full partner in the venture. Beware of power asymmetry in relationships like these.
- _delirium 12y ago
  Hoefler is going to have a hard time arguing that Frere-Jones was only in the masthead for decorative purposes, it certainly seems to spread the message that Frere-Jones is to be considered a full partner in the venture. Their webpage as of a few months ago also listed him as a "Principal" [1], which isn't a precisely defined term, but usually implies something like a partner or co-owner. [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20131028065322/http://www.typography.com/about/biographies.php https://web.archive.org/web/20131028065322/http://www.typogr...
  - jacquesm 12y ago
    That might be worth saving somewhere as a pdf or as a notarized screenshot or something to that effect. The archive will remove pages if requested and this could come in very handy during the lawsuit.
- legutierr 12y ago
  > promises of shares are worth nothing, This is being litigated, no? I think it will be up to a court to decide what those promises are worth. Contracts don't need to be written, and if the court determines that a verbal contract had in fact been entered into by both parties, and was broken by Hoefler, then Frere should walk away with something of value, probably a good amount of cash.
- Silhouette 12y ago
  I sincerely hope that this suit will be resolved amicably, and if it isn't that the firm will be named Frere-Jones Inc. when they're done. Sadly, any prospect of amicable resolution seems to have disappeared a long time ago. But I don't see how Hoefler is going to come out of this well. As far as I know, I'm still waiting to meet the person who has an interest in typography and considers the theory that FJ was only ever an employee credible. An increasing amount of actual evidence, from phrasing of e-mails to direct statements from former employees at H&FJ, seems to outright contradict the Hoefler version of history. Even if a court finds in favour of Hoefler, which appears to be a plausible outcome based on the various time limits and other legal technicalities even if the court otherwise accepts FJ's version of the facts, Hoefler is becoming a toxic figure in the community, and that community makes buying decisions. This will surely affect H&Co's profits, no matter what result they might get in court.

jacquesm 12y ago

Something similar happened to me when I was young and stupid and I still have a bad feeling about that decades later. This should serve as a warning to anybody in a similar position: promises of shares are worth nothing, if you are in a vesting arrangement make sure you get the actual shares on the promised dates, otherwise you are being taken for a ride, if you are a co-founder and there is no vesting make sure you get your shares right now. Particularly galling here is this paragraph from the linked text: "Update (Jan. 17, 2:45pm ET): HFJ released a statement, set in the firm’s Mercury typeface, denying Frere-Jones’s claims and saying the company will henceforth be known as Hoefler & Co.: " So, as long as you're working without a stake in the company but on vague promises your compensation is limited to your salary + having your name as an equal partner on the company letterhead but as soon as you so much as try to enforce your rights you're being removed as if you never existed. Classy. I sincerely hope that this suit will be resolved amicably, and if it isn't that the firm will be named Frere-Jones Inc. when they're done. Hoefler is going to have a hard time arguing that Frere-Jones was only in the masthead for decorative purposes, it certainly seems to spread the message that Frere-Jones is to be considered a full partner in the venture. Beware of power asymmetry in relationships like these.

_delirium 12y ago
Hoefler is going to have a hard time arguing that Frere-Jones was only in the masthead for decorative purposes, it certainly seems to spread the message that Frere-Jones is to be considered a full partner in the venture. Their webpage as of a few months ago also listed him as a "Principal" [1], which isn't a precisely defined term, but usually implies something like a partner or co-owner. [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20131028065322/http://www.typography.com/about/biographies.php https://web.archive.org/web/20131028065322/http://www.typogr...
- jacquesm 12y ago
  That might be worth saving somewhere as a pdf or as a notarized screenshot or something to that effect. The archive will remove pages if requested and this could come in very handy during the lawsuit.
legutierr 12y ago
> promises of shares are worth nothing, This is being litigated, no? I think it will be up to a court to decide what those promises are worth. Contracts don't need to be written, and if the court determines that a verbal contract had in fact been entered into by both parties, and was broken by Hoefler, then Frere should walk away with something of value, probably a good amount of cash.
Silhouette 12y ago
I sincerely hope that this suit will be resolved amicably, and if it isn't that the firm will be named Frere-Jones Inc. when they're done. Sadly, any prospect of amicable resolution seems to have disappeared a long time ago. But I don't see how Hoefler is going to come out of this well. As far as I know, I'm still waiting to meet the person who has an interest in typography and considers the theory that FJ was only ever an employee credible. An increasing amount of actual evidence, from phrasing of e-mails to direct statements from former employees at H&FJ, seems to outright contradict the Hoefler version of history. Even if a court finds in favour of Hoefler, which appears to be a plausible outcome based on the various time limits and other legal technicalities even if the court otherwise accepts FJ's version of the facts, Hoefler is becoming a toxic figure in the community, and that community makes buying decisions. This will surely affect H&Co's profits, no matter what result they might get in court.