Although most employers are very familiar with the usual discovery process of litigation, they may not be as familiar with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure’s Rule 202, which concerns pre-suit depositions. Rule 202 can be used, for example, by an employer who wants to learn more about a former employee’s activities before commencing a
What Does it Mean to “Modify” an Unenforceable Non-Competition Covenant Under Georgia’s Restrictive Covenants Act?
Although Georgia’s Restrictive Covenants Act has been on the books since the spring of 2011, no judge has decided the exact scope of Georgia courts’ blue-penciling abilities – until now. In a case of first impression, Judge Thrash of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, in LifeBrite Laboratories, LLC v.
Selective Enforcement Not A Viable Defense to Non-Competition Agreements Under Ohio Law
Employers sometimes worry whether seeking to enforce their non-competes in some circumstances but not others might preclude enforcement altogether in the future. Not so, says one court. Applying Ohio law, the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee, in GCA Services v. ParCou, held in a discovery ruling that information regarding
Federal District Court In Missouri Raises Doubts Concerning Whether At-Will Employment Is Consideration For A Non-Compete Agreement
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, in Durrell v. Tech Electronics, Inc., 4:16-CV-01367 (E.D. Mo. Nov. 15, 2016), held that an at-will employee’s non-compete agreement may not be enforceable where the only form of consideration is the employee’s at-will employment status since an at-will employment relationship cannot constitute consideration.
White House Continues Attack on Non-Compete Agreements
The assault on non-compete agreements has continued in a significant way, as outlined in our web article, White House Continues Attack on Non-Compete Agreements. The latest White House document, coupled with prior reports from the White House and Treasury Department, as well as actions initiated by the Attorney General of New York and the Attorney
Non-Solicitation Agreement Enforced in Wisconsin
There are so many stories about restrictive covenants being unenforceable in Wisconsin that it is refreshing to see a case where a restrictive covenant is enforced – especially at the preliminary injunction stage. This week, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin granted a preliminary injunction in favor of BMO Harris Bank,
Applying Delaware Law, Federal Trial Court in Texas Determines that Restrictive Covenants in Incentive Stock Agreements Are Overbroad and Unenforceable as Written
The importance of drafting non-competition and other restrictive covenant agreements narrowly in terms of geography, duration and scope of activities to reasonably meet the employer’s legitimate business interests should not be underestimated. A recent decision from the Southern District of Texas illustrates the importance of narrowly crafting post-employment restrictions.
In Cameron International Corporation v. Abbiss
Texas Court Reminds: Lost Sales Are Not Lost Profits
Proof of damages in restrictive covenant matters can be complicated. In Rhymes v. Filter Resources, Inc., the Ninth Court of Appeals in Beaumont, Texas reminded parties that revenue and sales are not the same as lost profits, and expenses must be considered when developing a damage model.
George Rhymes (“Rhymes”) was employed by Filter Resources
Illinois Statute Bars Non-Competes For Low-Wage Workers
Illinois has a new non-compete statute that bans the use of non-compete agreements with “low-wage” employees.
Peter Bulmer in our Chicago office has written this article on the Jackson Lewis website analyzing the new law, which takes effect January 1, 2017, and explaining the context which led to its enactment: Illinois Freedom to Work Act:
Groundhog Day for Massachusetts Non-Compete Reform
Once again, the Massachusetts legislature was unable to agree on non-compete reform legislation by the July 31, 2016, end of the current legislative session. The House and Senate had passed versions of non-compete reform that differed on key provisions. At the end of the session, however, the House and Senate failed to pass a compromise