Consideration

News & Analysis as of

Wisconsin Joins Illinois in Addressing Whether Continued Employment Constitutes Lawful Consideration for Mid-Stream Non-Competes

The Wisconsin Supreme Court recently brought much needed clarity to Wisconsin employers — and helpful guidance for other jurisdictions — in ruling that continued at-will employment constitutes legal consideration to support a...more

Recapping Major Non-Compete News from Around the Nation

..New Mexico has passed a new law that limits physician non-compete agreements. Although the law places some limitations on restrictive covenants for doctors, it is not an outright ban of such restrictions (of the...more

Wisconsin Supreme Court Holds That Continued Employment Constitutes Adequate Consideration for Restrictive Covenants

The Wisconsin Supreme Court recently issued a decision holding that continued employment is adequate consideration for restrictive covenants. In Runzheimer International, Ltd. v. Friedlen, et al., No. 2013AP1392 (April 30,...more

Consideration for Covenants

The recent UK High Court decision in Re-use Collections Limited v Sendall & May Glass Recycling Ltd, highlights to employers that new restrictive covenants will not be enforceable against employees unless substantial...more

Wisconsin Supreme Court: Continued Employment Is Lawful Consideration for a Non-Compete

On April 30, 2015, the Wisconsin Supreme Court took a stand on a hot-button for employers by holding that continued at-will employment is legal consideration that will support a reasonably drafted restrictive covenant signed...more

Noncompete Law in France—Payment of a Noncompete is Required During Garden Leave

In France, a valid noncompete clause in an employment contract must provide for the payment of financial compensation to the departing employee, as long as the employee remains bound by and complies with the clause’s terms...more

New Arkansas Law Boldly Embraces Noncompetition Provisions

On April 2, 2015, Arkansas enacted a new law (the Act) that greatly expands the enforceability of noncompete agreements in the state. The Act makes striking changes to Arkansas non-compete law. ...more

Illinois Restrictive Covenants: The “Gray” Bright Line Regarding Sufficient Consideration

Illinois non-compete law continues to wend a circuitous path through the employment landscape, making it occasionally difficult for employers and employees alike to predict outcomes in these cases....more

Post Termination Restrictions: Always Consider Consideration

The recent case of Re-Use Collections Ltd v Sendall [2014] EWHC 3852 (QB) is a timely reminder to employers everywhere of the importance of providing meaningful consideration when attempting to tie-up existing employees with...more

Recent Illinois Federal Court Rulings Cloud Fifield’s Bright-Line Test

Two recent rulings in the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division and the Central District of Illinois, Peoria Division, have further blurred the “bright line” two-year consideration rule established by the Illinois...more

Re-examining the M&A Playbook for Non-consenting Stockholders in Light of Cigna Health

In a case that is likely to impact M&A structuring for certain transactions, the Delaware Court of Chancery held that (1) stockholder release obligations found only in a letter of transmittal and not in the related merger...more

The Courts Continue to Debate Restrictive Covenant Enforcement in Illinois – UPDATED 2/20

From time to time, other attorneys with our firm will contribute blog posts on items that may be of interest to members of the labor and employment law community. Today, we are fortunate to have a post contributed by Jason...more

Fifield Update: Two Federal District Courts Conclude That The Illinois Supreme Court Will Ultimately Reject Fifield's Two-Year...

In the last issue of The Fast Laner, we reported that the Illinois Court of Appeals, Third District, followed Fifield v. Premier Dealer Servs. and held that, in the absence of other consideration, continued at-will employment...more

Illinois Court Rulings Vary on Consideration for Noncompetes

Recent decisions from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois and the Illinois Appellate Court for the Third District (consisting of Bureau, Fulton, Grundy, Hancock, Henderson, Henry, Iroquois, Kankakee,...more

Illinois Federal Court Rejects Bright-Line Rule on Consideration Needed for Competition Restrictions

On February 6, 2015, the U. S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in Chicago rejected the bright-line rule, created by the Illinois Appellate Court in the often maligned Fifield v. Premier Dealer Servs.,...more

Illinois Courts Continue To Apply Fifield; Employers Should Closely Examine Non-Competes To Ensure Enforceability

In 2013, the Illinois Appellate Court issued a decision, Fifield v. Premier Dealer Servs., Inc., which held that the promise of at-will employment was insufficient consideration to support an otherwise enforceable non-compete...more

New Year’s Resolution for Missouri Employers: Arbitration Agreements In Light of Jimenez v. Cintas Corporation

Still looking for a New Year’s resolution? The Missouri Court of Appeals rang in 2015 by refusing to enforce an arbitration agreement between an employer and an employee. The decision continues the robust trend in Missouri of...more

SEC Charges Attorney For Allegedly False Legal Opinion

Last week, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced charges against an attorney who was allegedly involved in the filing of false registration statements.  The SEC’s order instituting proceedings alleges that the...more

Minnesota Supreme Court Holds that Medical Staff Bylaws Are an Enforceable Contract

In an opinion released on December 31, 2014, the Supreme Court of Minnesota held that medical staff bylaws can be an enforceable contract and that a hospital’s medical staff (as an unincorporated association) can have the...more

Food Fights Make Bad Law

The axiom "hard facts make bad law" never held so true than in the case of the Minnesota Supreme Court's decision in Medical Staff of Avera Marshall Regional Medical Center vs. Avera Marshall, issued on December 31, 2014. ...more

Is “One Dollar” Sufficient for a Patent Assignment?

You may have read the recitals or introductory clauses in a license or an assignment agreement. In most cases, these clauses are just skimmed, if they are reviewed at all. In a recent decision of the US Federal Circuit Court...more

Private Company M&A: Post-Closing Purchase Price Adjustment Provisions: New Decision Holds Some Common Mechanics Unenforceable

In private company acquisitions, it is common for the buyer to require that a portion of the merger consideration be set aside in escrow as an accessible source of funds to cover the buyer’s post-closing indemnification...more

Consideration for Restrictive Covenants

In Re-use Collections Limited v Sendall & May Glass Recycling Limited 2014 EWHC 3852, the High Court considered the enforceability of restrictive covenants introduced during the course of employment and in respect of which no...more

Do Post-Closing Merger Price Adjustments Comport With DGCL?

Delaware courts have routinely upheld post-closing merger price adjustments that comply with the requirements of Section 251 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. To allow stockholders to make an informed decision as to...more

Pa. Supreme Court: Non-Compete Restrictions Need Clarifying

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has agreed to review Socko v. Mid-Atlantic Systems of CPA, Inc., a case of interest to employers regarding what consideration is necessary to support employee non-compete agreements. The court...more

56 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 3

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, 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.
×