The Massachusetts Legislature has spent the past several years seeking to regulate the use of restrictive covenant agreements in the Commonwealth. Despite repeatedly falling short in that initiative, the 2017 legislative session strongly signaled the Legislature’s enduring interest in this
Restrictive Covenant Report
A blog on restrictive covenants, trade secrets, and unfair competition for employers
The Restrictive Covenant Report, published by Jackson Lewis P.C., focuses on legal developments and regulatory changes related to restrictive covenants in employment agreements. The blog covers topics such as non-compete agreements, no-poach agreements, garden leave provisions, and geographic and temporal limitations on restrictive covenants. It tracks legislative updates across various states, including new laws affecting healthcare practitioners and physicians, and analyzes the impact of these laws on employer and employee rights. The blog also discusses court interpretations and enforcement trends, providing insights into how restrictive covenant laws evolve and affect workforce mobility and employer protections.
Latest from Restrictive Covenant Report - Page 8
Federal Court Interprets Florida and Pennsylvania Law To Endorse Protection Of Salon Services Company’s Customer Relationships And Specialized Information
In states that permit the enforcement of non-compete and other restrictive covenant agreements against former employees, companies must still demonstrate that the restrictions are designed to protect a legitimate business interest, and not to simply avoid ordinary competition. In Osborne…
New Jersey Bill Would Limit Non-Compete Agreements
A bill in the New Jersey Senate, Senate Bill 3518 (“SB 3518”), and an identical companion bill in the New Jersey Assembly (Assembly Bill 5261), would significantly curtail the use of non-compete agreements in New Jersey. In an article posted…
Minnesota Court Of Appeals Reaffirms That A Non-Compete Must Be Part Of A Job Offer To A Prospective Employee
Last month, this Blog highlighted a Minnesota decision evaluating the consideration required for non-compete agreements entered into after the commencement of employment. As that decision held, such agreements must be supported by valuable consideration over and above continued employment.
This month,…
SCOTUS Declines To Review Password Sharing Prosecution Under Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
Our Workplace Privacy, E-Communication and Data Security Practice Group recently posted this article regarding the United States Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari in Nosal v. Unites States, 16-1344. This Blog previously posted articles about the Nosal case, which can be…
Clear as Mud: Illinois Courts Continue to Grapple With The “Adequacy” Of Consideration for Non-Compete Agreements
It is axiomatic that a contract requires consideration to be binding. Ordinarily, courts only inquire into the existence, but not the “adequacy,” of consideration. Illinois courts, however, also scrutinize the adequacy of consideration when it comes to determining whether restrictive…
Georgia Court of Appeals Confirms Non-Solicitation of Employees Covenant Need Not Have Geographic or Material Contact Language
As previously noted in Jackson Lewis’ Non-Compete & Trade Secrets Report, Georgia adopted legislation governing restrictive covenant agreements entered into on or after May 11, 2011. This law, however, does not address employee non-solicitation (i.e., anti-pirating) covenants, leaving courts to…
Continued Employment Isn’t Always Sufficient – Minnesota Requires Additional Consideration For Non-Compete With Current Employee
The Minnesota federal district court recently refused to enforce a non-compete agreement, in part, because the employer failed to establish that the agreement was supported by valuable consideration. The decision, issued on October 6, 2017 in Mid-America Business Systems,…
Virginia Uniform Trade Secrets Act Prohibits Improper Acquisition of Trade Secrets, Regardless of Subsequent Use
Misappropriation of trade secrets claims can sometimes be difficult to sustain. While evidence of the taking of a trade secret may be available, evidence of its subsequent use may not. In Integrated Global Services, Inc. v. Michael Mayo, Case No.…
Federal Court Warns Companies – If You Don’t Protect Your Trade Secrets, Neither Will We
In 2016 Congress passed the Defend Trade Secrets Act, creating a federal cause of action for the theft of trade secrets. For a plaintiff attempting to prove that the information at issue is a trade secret, there is a tendency…