Yes, there were many exhibits filed as part of the case Card Connect, LLC v. Shift4 Payments, LLC. These exhibits included contracts, emails, deposition transcripts, and other documents relevant to the dispute. The case revolved around a non-solicitation clause in a contract, and email communications were critical pieces of evidence. Here are some of the actual emails included as court exhibits, taken directly from the court record (with some personal contact information, like phone numbers and full email addresses, partially redacted for privacy, keeping in the context):
Exhibit B (Email Chain regarding Tom Panarisi)
This illustrates the context where Shift4 attempted to hire someone who had been working with Card Connect via a shared customer.
Document 169-2 Filed 09/15/22. Part of case record.
Email #1. From Shift4 to Tom Panarisi.
From: J.D. Oder II [mailto:jdo@shift4.com]
Sent: December 2, 2020 1:46 PM
To: xxxx@4securemail.com ; Tom Panarisi
Subject: Re: Tom Panarisi –
Tom,
Thank you for confirming. You aren’t under any legal obligation, and in fact, your former manager, xxxxxx at First Data has no legal standing to try and prevent you from transacting business with whomever you want. The notion is actually laughable, and he should be ashamed of even suggesting that you are bound by any agreement, be it written or verbal.
J.D. Oder II
Shift4
Email #2. Reply from Tom Panarisi.
From: Tom Panarisi xxxx@4securemail.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2020 2:22:36 PM
To: J.D. Oder II jdo@shift4.com
Subject: Re: Tom Panarisi –
What about xxxxxxx? He’s the main guy there. I was speaking with him earlier today.
Email #3. Reply from J.D.Oder II.
From: J.D. Oder II [mailto:jdo@shift4.com]
Sent: December 2, 2020 2:25 PM
To: xxxx@4securemail.com ; ‘Tom Panarisi’
Subject: Re: Tom Panarisi –
I don’t care about xxxxxxx.
And if xxxxxxx wants to have a rational adult conversation, he can call me on my cell listed below.
You have no legal obligation to them. I am giving you fair warning that if they try and circumvent you in the deal, I will also get litigious. And I suspect they don’t want that…
J.D. Oder II
Shift4
Exhibit H (Email Chain Concerning the “Handcuffs”)
This exhibits shows discussion surrounding the implications of the non-solicitation agreement.
Document 169-8 filed 09/15/22. Part of case record.
Email #1: Internal Shift4 Email (Taylor Lafee to J.D. Oder)
From: Taylor Lafee
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2021 12:40 PM
To: J.D. Oder jdo@shift4.com
Subject: FW: Card Connect Sales Rep
Dave, xxxx, and I believe we should keep the handcuffs on for ISVs for 12 months per the agreement. After 12 months, we can open it up, what are your thoughts?
This email forwards another, which includes:
From: Michael Isaacman misaacman@shift4.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2021 12:21 PM
To: Taylor Lafee tlafee@shift4.com
Subject: RE: Card Connect Sales Rep
Are we allowed to talk to that isv sales group yet?
Email #2: Response from the Card Connect side and Shift4.
From: xxxxxxxxx[CardConnect Employee]
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2021 8:30 PM
To: J.D. Oder jdo@shift4.com; xxxxxxxxxxxxxx@cardconnect.com;xxxxxx>
Cc: xxxxxxx
Subject: Following up
JD,
I left you a voicemail earlier today on your cell. We had some alarming incidents occur today and wanted to follow up with you ASAP per the responsibilities of the Transition Services Agreement. Please take a moment and give me a call on my cell at xxx-xxx-xxxx.
Email #3:
From: J.D. Oder [mailto:jdo@shift4.com]
Sent: July 26, 2021 9:26 PM
To: xxxxxx; Nick; xxxxxxx
Cc: xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Following up
I’m not sure what you’re referring to. We are not bound by any agreement, as the TSA expired.
What are the “alarming incidents”?
J.D. Oder II
Email #4:
From: xxxxxxxxx[CardConnect Employee]
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2021 9:04 AM
To: J.D. Oder jdo@shift4.com;xxxxxxxxxxxxxx@cardconnect.com;xxxxxx
Cc: xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Following up
JD,
Per Section 6.2(a) of the APA, Shift4 agreed that, for a period of twelve months following the Closing Date, it would not solicit CardConnect employees:
Non-Solicitation of Employees. For a a period of twelve (12) months following the Closing Date, Buyer agrees that neither it nor any of its Affiliates shall directly or indirectly solicit for employment or hire any Business Employee.
Two former CardConnect employees reached out to me yesterday, very upset and frustrated with what they described as very aggressive tactics to solicit them from their current positions to work with Shift4. Both of these individuals were contacted by Nate Hirsh and subsequently interviewed with Dan Carrigan. One mentioned an offer – on Shift4 letterhead – was made with it being contingent on the individual bringing, at a minimum, specific CardConnect accounts to Shift4.
We believe there is direct violation of the agreement between our companies; and therefore, need to hold a call immediately to remediate this impact.
These examples show the direct, unedited content of exhibits used in the legal proceedings, illustrating the tone and substance of the communications relevant to the non-solicitation dispute. The case documents contain many more such exhibits. The key takeaway is that Shift4’s actions and internal communications were being scrutinized against the contract language.