TRO Issued Enjoining Breach Of Non-Compete Agreement Clauses

California Business and Professions Code Section 16600 provides that “every contract by which anyone is restrained from engaging in a lawful profession, trade, or business of any kind is to that extent void.” As discussed in this legal alert, the California Supreme Court in Edwards v. Arthur Andersen, 44 Cal. 4th 937 (2008), shut the legal door on non-competition agreements that do not fit within specific statutory exceptions. In doing so, the California Supreme Court considered the so-called “narrow-restraint” exception applied in several Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decisions.

Thus, it was interesting to see that U.S. District Court Judge Lucy H. Koh recently issued a temporary restraining order enjoining breach of certain provisions of a non-compete agreement. In Richmond Technologies, Inc. v. Aumtech Busines Solutions, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71269 (July 1, 2011), Judge Koh found that the non-solicitation and non-interference provisions of a non-disclosure agreement were likely to be found unenforceable under California law.

Please see full article below for more information.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Published In: Business Organization Updates, Civil Remedies Updates, General Business Updates, Intellectual Property Updates, Labor & Employment Updates

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »