Alpine Consulting claims a former employee launched a rival firm and lured away clients using confidential company information
A D.C. consulting firm is suing a former employee, alleging he poached clients and misused confidential data to launch a competing business.
Alpine Consulting Partners, LLC, based in Washington, D.C., filed its complaint against Kevin Jacokes and his new venture, Good Consulting, LLC, in federal court. The case, which moved forward after a decision on October 17, 2025, centers on allegations that Jacokes broke his employment agreement and took sensitive company information with him when he left.
According to Alpine, Jacokes worked for the firm for more than three years before being told in early September 2024 that his employment would end later that month. In the days before his official departure, Alpine alleges, Jacokes set up Good Consulting, a rival firm in Virginia, and reached out to Alpine’s clients. The complaint claims that Jacokes used his access to Alpine’s confidential models, customer lists, contracts, blueprints, data, and pricing information to solicit clients for Good Consulting. Alpine alleges that six clients terminated their relationships with the company as a result.
The company says Jacokes’ employment agreement included a confidentiality agreement, a prohibition on soliciting Alpine’s clients during his employment and for 24 months after, and a non-disparagement clause. Alpine alleges that Jacokes continued to use confidential information after his termination, including information on his Alpine-issued laptop that remained in his possession.
Alpine’s lawsuit accuses Jacokes and Good Consulting of breach of contract, tortious interference, and violations of the Federal Defend Trade Secrets Act and the D.C. Uniform Trade Secrets Act. The complaint states that Jacokes failed to safeguard Alpine’s confidential information, refused to return it after termination, and used it for improper purposes.
Jacokes and Good Consulting moved to dismiss the case, arguing the court lacked personal and subject-matter jurisdiction. Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan denied the motion on October 17, 2025, finding that the employment agreement’s forum selection clause and the alleged conduct provided sufficient grounds for jurisdiction in Washington, D.C. The case will proceed, and the court will consider the merits of Alpine’s claims.
For HR professionals, this lawsuit highlights the importance of clear employment agreements and robust protection of proprietary information during employee transitions. The outcome may influence how organizations safeguard client relationships and sensitive business data when employees leave for potential competitors.
