The inevitable disclosure doctrine is a common law doctrine that has been used by some courts to prevent a former employee from working for a competitor, even in the absence of a non-compete, because the former employee’s new job duties would inevitably require him to rely upon, use or disclose his former employer’s trade secrets. 

When an executive search firm bought the goodwill and other assets of a similar firm and learned that the individual sellers took client lists and diverted business in violation of their non-compete agreements, it terminated the sellers’ employment and sued them and other third-party defendants for violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”) as

Regardless of where one stands philosophically on the merits of working from a physical office where greater collegiality can be fostered, versus working from home where personal efficiency and convenience can be maximized, the fact is that most companies have some employees who work from home, and nearly all companies have employees who work remotely

A federal court in the Northern District of Mississippi has allowed a plaintiff in an employment law dispute to conduct an on-site inspection for purposes of videotaping the machine which he formerly operated in Morton v. Cooper Tire & Rubber Co., (N.D. Miss. Dec. 10, 2012). Morton, an amputee with a prosthetic leg, asserted that

A U.S. District Judge in Connecticut recently issued an injunction against a former employee of Amphenol Corp and his new employer, TE Connectivity, Ltd, despite the lack of any evidence of competition in breach of his non-compete agreement.  The decision in Amphenol v Paul, Civ. No. 3:12cv543 (D. Conn. Nov. 9, 2012),  involved a

Kevlar (R), a high-strength para-aramid fiber created by E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company and famously used in body armor for soldiers and police officers, is the subject of a recent criminal indictment by the U.S. Justice Department against Kolon Industries, Inc. and several of its executives. According to the October 18, 2012