I mean, say you're Mattel and you have a nasty, exclusive, NDA-ridden contract with some key employees. MGA surreptitiously hires those employees for side projects. Obviously, you can have a cause of action against the employees. But against MGA?
Mattel believed that it owned the rights to designs created by its employees, and Carter Bryant was an employee. Another company profits from the design Mattel believes it owns, so they sue the company.
Mattel produced evidence that Bryant used Mattel resources and time, and even got other employees to help with the design.
Urgh... I could grudgingly accept that that argument could be a legal reason for MGA to turn over the design to Mattel. I see no reason for Mattel to be able to recover damages from MGA, who didn't do anything wrong, rather than from Bryant.
Mattel believed that it owned the rights to designs created by its employees, and Carter Bryant was an employee. Another company profits from the design Mattel believes it owns, so they sue the company.
Mattel produced evidence that Bryant used Mattel resources and time, and even got other employees to help with the design.