Job Share

An attorney’s multiple employments drew an agreed six-month suspension without terms by the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board

On February 7, 2023, Respondent began working for Ulta Beauty (“Ulta”) as a director level senior legal counsel responsible for the intellectual property, marketing, antitrust and commercial practice areas. Respondent’s direct supervisor, initials “MM,” was, Vice President and Assistant General Counsel who reported to Jodi Caro, General Counsel for Ulta. Respondent worked remotely from her home in Florida but traveled to Illinois three days a month, sometimes more.

Ulta’s policy prohibits outside employment without Ulta’s permission.

In May 2024, Respondent received an offer to become the Vice President of Intellectual Property and Marketing with Chico’s FAS, Inc. (“Chico’s”), which is a subsidiary of the KnitWell Group (“KnitWell”).

Respondent accepted the offer on May 23, 2024, and she asked for and received a delayed starting date of June 24, 2024. Respondent’s supervisor was Mara Calame, General Counsel for KnitWell. Respondent worked remotely from her home in Florida with an expectation and requirement that she would make occasional visits to Chico’s headquarters in Ft. Myers, Florida.

Respondent did not notify Ulta that she accepted another position. Were this matter to have gone to a hearing, the Respondent would have testified under oath that at the time she accepted employment by Chico’s it was her intention to resign from Ulta imminently and in a manner so as not to disrupt the projects upon which she was working.

Were this matter to have gone to a hearing, Respondent would also testify under oath that her delay in resigning from Ulta was occasioned both by her indecision about whether she had made the right choice by accepting employment by Chico’s and her belief that Ulta would have been significantly disadvantaged and overburdened were she to have resigned from employment by Ulta as of her start date with Chico’s due to the recent and unexpected loss of a lawyer on Ulta’s legal team in early June for which Respondent willingly picked up some of her workload.

Respondent worked full-time positions for both Ulta and Chico’s simultaneously for approximately two months, while being conflicted over which role was best for her future and her family, during which period she did not disclose to either employer that she was working for the other. Neither employer complained about Respondent’s performance of legal services.

The dual employment was discovered by both employers. (Mike Frisch)