Hardly. In fact I'd bet what Quinn Emanuel will say is that on receipt of the 'eyes only' confidential document, the intention was redact it appropriately and pass on the redacted version to those executive in Samsung who had right to see it in relation to the (then) ongoing Apple v Samsung case. And that unfortunately, due to a mistake by a staffer, the document was not redacted prior to circulation - the error being the staffer's sole responsibility, due to carelessness or failure to understand strict instructions provided.
I get the desire to find conspiracies, malpractice and bribery wherever possible, and Samsung's executives do a fair job of stoking the fire, but plain, simple errors are way, way, more common.
Even so, the first executive who saw it should have taken steps to destroy physical copies and remove electronic copies. Also, they should not have acted upon the information.