After enacting its non-compete law on April 7, 2016, Utah has twice amended the law to address additional restrictions on non-competes in the broadcasting industry. Governor Gary Herbert signed the second of those amended bills on March 22, 2019.
The Original Non-Compete Law
Utah’s original non-compete law, which we covered in an article dated April
As we have reported in previous articles, the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division has repeatedly reaffirmed its intent to criminally prosecute companies that restrict labor market competition through the use of unlawful no-poach and wage-fixing agreements. On May 17, 2018, a high-ranking Division official offered further guidance by announcing that the Division is taking a
In the past week, two states have made modifications to their respective non-compete laws. On March 27, 2018, Utah imposed special restrictions on the use of non-compete agreements in the broadcasting industry. One day later, Idaho modified the standard of proof that must be followed when a company seeks an injunction against a former employee
The chief prosecutor in the U.S. Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division signaled last week that his unit expects to initiate criminal actions against multiple companies accused of entering unlawful pacts not to hire each other’s employees. Such action would fulfill earlier promises, by both the Trump and Obama Administrations, to treat employment-related antitrust violations with
Conrad S. Kee from our Salt Lake City office and Cliff Atlas, co-chair of the firm’s non-compete practice group have written on the firm’s website about two new important laws in Utah, the Post-Employment Restrictions Act and the Computer Abuse and Data Recovery Act.
M. Robin Davis and Conrad S. Kee have written on the Jackson Lewis website about a recent decision from the North Carolina Supreme Court reversing a court of appeals decision and re-affirming that judges in that state may only apply a limited blue pencil to non-compete agreements.
In a 3-2 decision, the Utah Supreme Court has held that there is a presumption of harm for claims made under the Utah Uniform Trade Secrets Act, Utah Code § 13-24-1, et seq., and for claims for breach of a non-disclosure agreement when a former employee takes confidential information or trade secrets from her recent
A recent Illinois federal court decision has called into question the much begrudged holding from the Illinois Appellate Court for the First District, First Division, in Eric Fifield and Enterprise Financial Group, Inc. v. Premier Dealer Services, Inc., 373 Ill. Dec. 379, 993 N.E. 2d 938 (Ill. App. Ct. June 24, 2013).
The Fifield
In a recent Tennessee case, Fidelity Brokerage Services LLC v. Melissa Clemens, No. 2:13-CV-239 (E.D. Tenn., Nov. 4, 2013), the Court entered a preliminary injunction prohibiting a former employee from soliciting customers or prospective customers she served while working for Fidelity, from soliciting Fidelity’s employees, and from using Fidelity’s confidential information. As we previously
Shawn Kee has written on the Jackson Lewis website about a recent decision from the Court of Appeals of Tennessee, James F. Dill Jr. et al v. Continental Car Club, Inc., in which the Court held that a non-compete was narrowly enforceable under Tennessee law, although it declined to enforce a Florida choice-of-law provision which