We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 19

Top 10 developmentsheadlines in trade secret, computer fraud, and non-compete law in 2012

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 31 2012

As part of our annual tradition, here is our list of the top 10 developmentsheadlines in trade secret, computer fraud, and non-compete law for 2012

Top 10 2011 developmentsheadlines in trade secret, computer fraud, and non-compete law

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 17 2012

We have compiled a list of the top 2011 developmentsheadlines in trade secret, computer fraud, and non-compete law

Ninth circuit overturns $172 million trade secrets award in rival toy makers’ epic dispute

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 25 2013

After more than eight years of litigation and two jury trials over the Bratz doll line, rival toy makers Mattel, Inc. and MGA Entertainment, Inc. may

California Appellate Court holds that non-compete restriction in stipulated injunction is enforceable because there was no showing that it was not necessary to protect trade secrets

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 12 2012

A California Court of Appeal recently reversed a trial court ruling that found a stipulated injunction preventing the solicitation of customers was invalid and unenforceable under California Business & Professions Code section 16000

Employers' obligation to defend and indemnify rogue employees in California?

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 14 2011

On October 12, 2011, the California Court of Appeal in Nicholas Laboratories, LLC v. Christopher Chen, No. G044105, 2011 WL 4823329 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 12, 2011), held that Labor Code section 2802 does not require an employer to reimburse its employee for attorney fees incurred in the employee’s successful defense of the employer’s action against the employee

New California Supreme Court decision will make it more difficult to enforce integrated written contracts

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 28 2013

A recent decision by the California Supreme Court will make it more difficult for parties to enforce integrated written contracts where allegations

Private information stored on electronic devices subject to search by law enforcement if arrested in California

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 16 2011

Police officers are free to review private and confidential information stored on your cell phone if the search is incident to an arrest in California

District court holds that computer forensic investigation costs satisfy "loss" requirement of Computer Fraud and Abuse Act

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 9 2011

A Colorado federal district court recently held that the computer forensic investigator costs of investigating Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) violations constitute "loss" under the statute

California court rules that non-competition agreement contained in employment agreement is unenforceable against former seller even though it was executed in connection with the sale of a business

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 29 2012

Noncompetition agreements executed in connection with the sale of a business are typically enforceable as a limited exception under Business and Professions Code section 16601 and applicable case authority to Californias general prohibition against noncompetition agreements

Fitness companies spar over unauthorized access of departing employee's personal e-mail accounts

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 25 2011

Wrongfully accessing someone's personal email account may cost you $1,000 per unauthorized access, even if that person suffers no injury or loss