What Happens at Work Stays at Work – The California Employer’s Approach To A National Program for Restrictive Covenants and Trade Secret Protection

In This Presentation:

The California Landscape: A Refresher

- Post-Termination Non-Competes

– Unenforceable under Bus. & Prof. Code §16600 and Edwards v. Arthur Andersen

– Other jurisdictions may allow if reasonably necessary to protect legitimate business interests and if reasonable in time and geographical scope

– Designating another state's law as controlling will not override CA public policy

– The “race to the courthouse”

- Excerpt from Post-Termination Non-Competes:

Non-competes may be enforceable IF:

– Qualifies under sale or dissolution of business ownership exception

– During employment

– For non-solicitation of customers and employees if necessary to protect trade secrets

..Caution: Edwards v. Arthur Anderson did not rule on the “trade secret exception”; subsequent CA and federal courts in flux

– Contained in an ERISA plan (preemption)

– Garden Leave -- not yet tested in CA

– Legitimate forum selection and choice of law clauses.

Please see full presentation below for more information.

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

Written by:

more+
less-

Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×
Loading...
×
×