Imperative Logistics has filed a lawsuit against Alabama Motor Express and two former employees, alleging that they orchestrated a coordinated effort to obtain confidential customer, pricing and operational information and use it to divert business away from the logistics provider.
Imperative Logistics LLC and its subsidiary, DTH Expeditors LLC, filed the complaint Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against Alabama Motor Express, which operates as AMX Expedited, along with former Imperative employees Joseph Cochran and Mary Evette Jones.
The company is seeking injunctive relief, compensatory and exemplary damages, attorneys’ fees and other costs. The lawsuit alleges the defendants misappropriated trade secrets, violated employee restrictive covenants and interfered with Imperative’s relationships with its customers.
Portland, Oregon-based Imperative Logistics provides freight logistics, freight forwarding and expedited freight services. The company acquired DTH Expeditors in February 2025.
Alabama Motor Express, headquartered in Ashford, Alabama, operates trucking, logistics, drayage and driver training businesses. Data from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration lists AMX with 234 power units and 234 drivers.
The lawsuit centers on Cochran and Jones, two longtime DTH employees who remained with the business following Imperative’s acquisition, according to court filings.
Jones had worked for DTH and Imperative since 2000 and was serving as director of operations when she left the company on Feb. 10. Cochran, who joined the company in 2005, worked as an area sales representative before resigning on March 30.
Both later joined AMX.
Imperative alleges their departures were not isolated. According to the complaint, five employees from the same Imperative office left in quick succession and subsequently went to work for AMX.
The logistics provider describes the moves as a “coordinated effort” allegedly encouraged by AMX to recruit key employees while gaining access to Imperative’s trade secrets, customer relationships and other confidential information.
Cochran and Jones had both signed restrictive covenant agreements, according to the lawsuit. Those agreements prohibited them from improperly using or disclosing trade secrets and confidential information, as well as from soliciting certain customers and employees after leaving the company.
Lawsuit alleges confidential customer and pricing information was taken
Imperative alleges that Cochran transferred confidential documents to his personal email account shortly before his departure, either sending the material directly or blind-copying his personal address.
The information allegedly included customer financial data, margin and pricing information, active shipment lists, sales codes, details concerning customer-specific logistics operations and a competitive bid.
According to Imperative, Cochran retained those materials so he could access the information after joining AMX.
A significant portion of the complaint concerns an unidentified longtime customer referred to as “Client A.”
After moving to AMX, Cochran allegedly began pursuing the customer’s freight and submitting bids against Imperative. The lawsuit says Cochran arranged a lunch with Client A despite Imperative having sent cease-and-desist letters.
Imperative says it discovered the lunch invitation after the customer mistakenly sent it to Cochran’s former company email address.
The logistics provider claims its revenue from Client A subsequently fell and that the customer began doing business with AMX. Imperative alleges AMX’s competing bids were informed by customer lists, shipment data, pricing information and competitive bid details that Cochran had allegedly taken from the company.
The allegations involving Jones concern her alleged access to Imperative’s computer systems after leaving the company.
Imperative claims Jones accessed its Google Drive systems on April 9 and April 14, nearly two months after her departure, and viewed at least 36 confidential files.
The files allegedly included standard operating procedures, rate sheets, quality policies and weekly operational notes relating to Client A.
Imperative contends that the access was intentional because someone would have had to log into the system and navigate through the files to view them.
The company alleges that Jones obtained information relating to pricing, customer lists, shipments, financial data, operating procedures and bids. It further claims she later solicited Imperative customers on behalf of AMX.
Imperative says AMX was warned about the former employees
According to the lawsuit, Imperative sent AMX cease-and-desist letters on June 5 regarding five former employees who had joined the carrier.
The letters demanded that AMX prevent those former employees from soliciting Imperative customers or employees or using the company’s confidential information and trade secrets.
AMX’s attorney responded on July 14, acknowledging receipt of the allegations concerning the restrictive covenant agreements and Imperative’s claim that AMX had tortiously interfered with those agreements.
Imperative nevertheless alleges that AMX continued employing Cochran and Jones in positions involving customer solicitation after receiving the letters and failed to ensure that they complied with their contractual obligations.
The lawsuit characterizes AMX’s hiring of five employees from the same Imperative office as a “targeted and coordinated effort to raid Imperative’s workforce.” Imperative alleges the carrier was seeking to divert established customer relationships rather than simply compete for new business.
The complaint brings seven counts against the defendants. They include alleged violations of the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act and the Georgia Trade Secrets Act, breach of contract claims against Cochran and Jones, a tortious interference claim against AMX, and a Computer Fraud and Abuse Act claim against Jones.
Imperative says Jones’ alleged unauthorized computer access alone generated at least $5,000 in investigation, forensic analysis, security and remediation costs.
The company is asking the court to bar the defendants from using its trade secrets or confidential information and from improperly soliciting its customers or employees. It also wants the defendants ordered to return or destroy any company information still in their possession.
Imperative is seeking unspecified compensatory damages, including lost profits and alleged unjust enrichment, along with disgorgement of benefits allegedly obtained through the conduct described in the complaint.
The company is also seeking exemplary damages of up to twice the compensatory damages awarded under federal and Georgia trade secrets laws.
Neither Imperative Logistics nor AMX responded to a request for comment from FreightWaves.
Why it matters
The case emphasizes the value of customer relationships, pricing data and operational know-how in the competitive freight market. The lawsuit also points out that the exit of a relatively small number of experienced employees can potentially shift freight volumes and revenue away from one logistics provider to another.
