American Family’s efforts to obtain a temporary restraining order against a former employee recently were rebuffed when Judge Krieger from the federal district court ruled that American Family had failed to sustain its burden.
In American Family v. Gustafson, 2008
Bond & Morris, P.C.
Bond & Morris, P.C. was founded in 1988. It is a multi-generational, family owned law firm devoted to the practice of all aspects of trusts and estates, including estate planning, estate administration, trust administration, tax planning, and litigation. For over 30 years, we have had the pleasure of serving the Rocky Mountain region while building long-term and mutually rewarding relationships with our clients.
Website:
https://www.bondmorris.com/
Latest from Bond & Morris, P.C. - Page 5
Utah rules that damages for breach of a non-compete limited to lost profits
By Dan Warden
In a November 2008 decision, TruGreen Companies v. Mower Brothers, the Utah Supreme Court ruled that lost profits is the appropriate measure of damages for breach of a contractual non-compete provision.
In TrueGreen, TruGreen Companies had argued that an unjust…
Unilateral contractual fee shifting provisions
By Dan Warden
Many non-compete agreements include provisions that state that the employer is entitled to recover any attorneys fees and costs incurred in connection with an action to enforce the non-compete. These provisions are unilateral or one-sided; they allow the employer to recover its…
Reasonable Restraints in Colorado
By Dan Warden
The prior post begs the question most frequently asked by clients: what is a reasonable restraint? That is, what kinds of geographic and temporal restraints will be enforced by Colorado courts — assuming that the non-compete falls within one of…
Colorado and the Blue Pencil Rule
By Dan Warden
In most, if not all states, any restriction imposed by a non-compete must be reasonable. Restrictions as to geographic area or duration must be no greater than necessary to protect the employer’s legitimate business interests. States follow different rules, however, once…
An employer seeking to enforce an assigned non-compete must demonstate that the non-compete was assigned
By Dan Warden
As the previous entry suggested, an employer in Colorado may be able to enforce an assigned non-compete under the proper circumstances.
In a recent case, however, an employee argued that the evidence was insufficient to find that his non-compete had actually been…
Are non-competes assignable?
By Dan Warden
As the economy declines, increased attention may be given to whether an employer may assign its rights under a non-compete. Businesses will fail and, when they fail, they will consider whether and how they can sell their assets, including non-competes.
Until recently, it…
Tenth Circuit may clarify when a non-compete begins to run
By Dan Warden
In an interesting development, Judge Daniel’s decision in Xantrex Technologies v. Advanced Energy Industries has been appealed to the Tenth Circuit. One of the issues on appeal is whether Judge Daniel erred when he ruled that the employee defendant should be enjoined…
Void means void; the validity of a non-compete is determined at the time of execution
By Dan Warden
In many non-compete cases, an issue arises about when the validity of a non-compete should be determined. Under Colorado’s non-compete statute, a non-compete won’t be enforce unless it falls within one of the four exceptions set forth in the statute. One of…
Differing opinions issued on the duration of a non-compete
By Dan Warden
In a recent decision, Phoenix Capital, Inc. v. Dowell, the Colorado Court of Appeals appeared to establish a “bright line” rule for determining the duration of an employee’s obligations under a non-compete. The trial court had ruled that the non-solicit provisions were only…