-
Originally published February 9, 2011
On January 20, 2011, three Massachusetts state representatives filed a bill in the legislature that, if enacte...
-
Originally published February 9, 2011
On January 20, 2011, three Massachusetts state representatives filed a bill in the legislature that, if enact...
-
On September 23, 2009, the Tennessee Court of Appeals, in
Cummings Incorporated v. Terry J. Dorgan, Jr., No.
M2008-00593-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Sep...
-
JURISDICTION - personal jurisdiction; out-of-state defendant; waiver; participation in the case. CONTRACTS - summary judgment; noncompetition agreement; consideration; weekly draw; commission; misappropriation of trade secrets; R.C. 1333.61; knowledge of profit margins.
-
Lewis-Gale Clinic asked a judge Friday to stop two of its former surgeons from seeing patients in the Roanoke Valley until they pay a disputed right-to-compete fee of nearly $250,000 each.
The Salem clinic asked the judge to order Dr. Preston Waldrop, a joint specialist who joined the clinic in 1991, and Dr. Gregory Riebel, a spine specialist there since 1998, to put down their scalpels. Lewis-Gale wants the money the doctors have earned working independently for more than a month placed in a trust until the case can be resolved. Roanoke Circuit Judge Jonathan Apgar did not rule on the request for a preliminary injunction, and plans to resume the case Jan. 11.
-
A non-compete agreement that prevented an employee from working for former clients after leaving the company is prohibited under a state statute, the California Supreme Court has ruled in a closely- watched case. The statute voids any contract that "restrains" someone's right to engage in a lawful profession, trade or business of any kind.
The employee was an accountant and tax manager with the Los Angeles office of Arthur Andersen. He was required to sign a noncompetition agreement which said that if he left the company, he could not work for former clients for 18 months or solicit any client of the Los Angeles office for one year.
-
Trade secrets; noncompetition agreement; summary judgment; tortious interference.
-
A chief concern of the owners of a closely held business is what would happen to the business if one of the owners could no longer continue. An integral part of any buy-sell agreement is to specify what type of situations will cause a mandatory or optional buy-out of an owner's interest by the other owners or the entity itself. The most common of these triggering events are: 1. death or disability, 2. desire to sell the interest to a third party, 3. retirement of an owner, and 4. owner's divorce or bankruptcy. Executing a carefully planned buy-sell agreement can assure owners in a closely held business that their interest in the business they built is secure regardless of any unforeseen circumstances. Other provisions to consider in a buy-sell agreement might be a noncompetition clause ...
-
The trial court properly declined to find merit to appellants argument for payment under the noncompetition agreement because appellant failed to raise the claim in his complaint; a claim cannot be asserted for the first time in an opposition brief; contract language regarding severance agreement was not ambiguous as through October clearly meant to the end of the month.
-
Enforcing noncompete or nonsolicitation agreements from the employee's perspective is often about staying power against a well-heeled opponent. It is ...