Library Search
-
Electronic Theft and Espionage: Federal Law Provides a Remedy ( January 2007 )
The federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“Act”), 18 U.S.C. § 1030, gives employers a helpful tool to use against former employees who wrongfully use information from the employer’s computer system to assist competitors in competing unfairly. As the Third Circuit recently noted “[e]mployers . . . are increasingly taking advantage of the [Act’s] civil remedies to sue former employees and their new companies who seek a competitive edge through wrongful use of information from the former employer’s computer system." -
Will Your Non-Compete Agreement Withstand a Court Challenge ( July 2006 )
Non-compete agreements have become more common in the workplace. A recent Franklin County Court of Appeals decision should have businesses reviewing these documents to make sure they will withstand scrutiny from the court system. In a case involving Midwestern Auto Group (MAG) and a former salesman, John Curran, the Court concluded that unless an employee possesses confidential or proprietary documents or trade secrets, or uses that information to solicit the former employer' customers, non-compete agreements will be difficult to enforce in court -
Five Things to Remember in Florida Non-Compete Injunctions ( April 2006 )
There are now different legal standards governing the enforceability of restrictive covenants in Florida, depending upon the period of time in which they were executed. Since the legal standards are quite different, they create "traps for the unwary." -
How Not to Hire Employees from a Competitor ( May 2005 )
A recent million dollar plus judgment highlights the importance of hiring people for their skills and not for their confidential business information especially when hiring employees working for direct competitors. -
New Eleventh Circuit Ruling in Palmer & Cay Promotes Racing to the Courthouse in Noncompete Disputes ( May 2005 )
Employers with multi-state noncompete contracts may want to lace up their best pair of running shoes and get ready for a race. On April 1, 2005, the 11th Circuit issued an opinion in Palmer & Cay, Inc. v. Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc., that some commentators are interpreting as an open door to forum shopping. -
The Human Face of Fraud ( June 2005 )
Dan Kerr had a towering ego. That was one of the reasons he was the top salesperson with Forrest Machinery Ltd., a medium-sized company that sold heavy equipment in Northern Ontario . But that same egocentricity was also the source of his downfall subsequent to an investigation of suspected wrong-doing at the company that had employed Kerr for almost two decades. -
Avoiding An "Implied" Employment Contract Or Drafting A Favorable One: A Primer ( March 2005 )
Employers sometimes inadvertently create employment contracts. This type of contract is implied by the employer’s actions and is binding on the employer - though it may be difficult to prove. Because an implied employment contract may arise during any communication with a potential new hire or employee, it is essential that all employers consider the implications and possibility of creating a binding contract when communicating with potential and existing employees. -
Massachusetts: Material Change in Employment Relationship Could Invalidate Prior Restrictive Covenant ( February 2005 )
For years, commentators have viewed Massachusetts as neutral territory for the enforcement of noncompete agreements. An employer’s need to protect its most important assets, including the company’s strategic vision, customer base, and trade secrets, has been delicately balanced against employees’ desire to shift alliances in an increasingly transient work environment. Whereas some states, such as New York, passively accept noncompetes, other states are outwardly hostile. -
In an important decision favoring employers, the New Jersey Supreme Court held that an employee did not have a cause of action for unlawful retaliatory discharge under the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act , even though she was fired for refusing to enter into an agreement containing post-employment restrictions. While New Jersey employers may still condition an employee's continued employment on his or her agreement to be bound by post-employment restrictions, <i>Maw</i> reaffirms that employers must continue to be cautious in drafting such agreements.
-
Hiring with Confidence ( April 2004 )
The single best predictor of an applicant's potential performance as an employee is the strength of the applicant's references. Yet many Arizona employers fear that providing honest reference information may result in defamation lawsuits.
Ads by FindLaw