California’s Governor signed Assembly Bill (AB) 1076 on October 13, 2023, which adds new Business & Professions Code §16600.1, making it unlawful to impose non-compete clauses on employees – which contractual restrictions already are void under Business & Professions Code §16600. Read more.
In many non-compete cases, the employer seeks a temporary injunction at the outset of the case to prevent further harm. If the employer loses that motion, the case usually settles or proceeds to discovery as in a standard civil action. However, there can be another option—immediate appeal. A recent Florida appellate decision demonstrates why this
Employers in the U.S. are facing regulatory upheaval on multiple fronts. The federal government has taken up a new interest in potentially limiting the applicability of restrictive covenants, such as non-compete agreements. Meanwhile, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has issued an Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) (currently stayed by the Fifth Circuit) requiring employers
Including non-compete covenants in physician employment and shareholder agreements is common practice. Whether they are legally enforceable as drafted varies from state to state. In this podcast, Jackson Lewis attorneys explore how hospital systems and medical groups can protect their goodwill and legitimate business interests.
Connecticut lawmakers recently introduced two bills that seek to ban non-competition agreements for physicians. If implemented, this would be the second time in five years that Connecticut has legislated in the area of physician restrictive covenants.
In mid-2016, Connecticut enacted legislation that implemented a maximum one-year temporal limitation on physician non-competition agreements, as well as
New Jersey may be next up to join the growing number of states that significantly restrict the use of non-competition agreements in employment. As we discussed back in December 2017, a bill proposed in New Jersey at the time, Senate Bill 3518, would “impose significant restrictions and limitations” on the use of restrictive covenants
In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, Indiana has enacted a new law governing non-compete agreements used with physicians.
Our Practice Group members in Indianapolis authored an article detailing the new law’s requirements. As the article notes, the new law raises multiple unanswered questions.
And, while not as sweeping as other statutes, Indiana now joins
Is anyone focusing on anything other than the COVID-19 Pandemic? Apparently, the Virginia legislature and governor are undeterred, enacting a series of new laws. Among them, Virginia has banned non-compete agreements for lower wage earners, becoming the most recent state to do so. A summary of the key provisions is included in this article written
Texas courts are increasingly encountering efforts to challenge restrictive covenant agreements on free speech grounds, where the restricted activity includes business-related communications. A recent Texas appellate court decision indicates that this strategy has its limits.
In Hieber v. Percheron Holdings, LLC, No. 14-19-00505-CV (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Nov. 14, 2019), Percheron Holdings, LLC (“Percheron”)
On November 14, 2019, the U.S. Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship held a hearing to examine recently proposed bills that would regulate non-compete agreements at the federal level. Discussion during the hearing indicates that it may have the necessary support to move forward.
Pending Non-Compete Legislation
On October 15, 2019, Senators Chris Murphy