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.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 78

Recent Illinois employee consideration case may invalidate certain restrictive covenants

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 8 2013

Restrictive covenants in an employment agreement are not enforceable unless the restrictions are supported by adequate consideration. In the past

Breach of contract claim may succeed where a misappropriation claim fails

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 28 2009

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit recently held that a former employer’s price quotations to prospective customers were not trade secrets under Oklahoma law because they did not contain a confidentiality provision, but the former employee who took advantage of those quotations on behalf of his new employer did violate his non-compete covenant

Illinois Appellate Court says legitimate business interest not necessary to enforce a covenant not to compete

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 5 2009

In a landmark decision just issued, the Illinois Appellate Court, Fourth District, ruled that an ex-employer seeking to enforce a covenant not to compete against former sales personnel need only show that the time and territory restrictions are reasonable and need not prove, in addition, that there is a sufficient legitimate business interest in enforcement

First Circuit court of appeals liberally construes personal jurisdiction, leading to 1.16 million dollar verdict

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 4 2010

Can a California corporation with virtually no ties to Rhode Island nonetheless be sued in Rhode Island federal court for misappropriation of a Rhode Island company’s trade secrets because the California corporation lured away a Florida employee who had a confidentiality agreement with the Rhode Island company?

Attorneys' fees assessed for failed effort to enforce an overbroad non-compete clause

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 23 2010

Kenyon International Emergency Services will pay a heavy price for seeking to enjoin eight former employees and their new employers from violating non-compete and non-solicitation restrictions found to be unreasonable

Missouri Federal Court finds violations of employment agreement may constitute unlawful access under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 6 2013

A recent Missouri federal court opinion describes an almost unbelievable scenario. Employees signed well-drafted employment agreements &mdash

Employer fires CEO and then obtains TRO enjoining him from breaching his non-disclosure, non-compete agreement

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 21 2010

Dakota Beef, a South Dakota processor and seller of organic beef products, hired Scott Lively in 2006 to be its CEO

The Eleventh Circuit splits with the Ninth Circuit in interpreting the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 7 2011

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals' December 27, 2010 decision in U.S. v. Rodriguez, Appeal No. 09-15265, -- F.3d --, 2010 WL 5253231 (11th Cir. Dec. 27, 2010) may mark a significant split among the federal appellate circuits over the meaning of the phrases “without authorization” and “exceeds authorized access” under the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. 1030 et seq. (“CFAA”

Injunctive relief and a substantial monetary judgment awarded to national CPA firm against former employees who breached non-compete agreements

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

The national CPA firm of Mayer Hoffman McCann P.C. (“MHM”), based in Missouri, scored a major victory when the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court’s injunctions and liquidated damages award of $1,369,921 against four former stockholder-employees in Minnesota

Jury must decide whether a manufacturing process that is disclosed in an expired patent and is not concealed from visitors to the plant constitutes a trade secret

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 21 2011

When a defendant, sued by a former employer for misappropriating a manufacturing process that allegedly constituted a trade secret, denies that the process is confidential and files a counterclaim alleging that the plaintiff is engaged in sham litigation in order to stifle competition, is it appropriate for the court to instruct the jury that the evidence shows plaintiff does not have a valid trade secret?