News & Analysis as of

Damages Former Employee

ArentFox Schiff

2023 Trade Secrets End of Year Report

ArentFox Schiff on

2023 was a banner year for trade secrets, non-competes, and other restrictive covenants. Employee non-competes continued to garner attention at the federal agency level, drawing commentary and action from the Federal Trade...more

Stikeman Elliott LLP

Ontario Superior Court of Justice Awards Retired VP $1.8m in Damages for Incentive Compensation and Vacation Pay

Stikeman Elliott LLP on

The Ontario Superior Court of Justice’s decision in Boyer v. Callidus, 2024 ONSC 20 (“Callidus”) serves as a helpful reminder to employers of the importance of carefully drafting, documenting, and communicating contractual...more

Fisher Phillips

Former Employees Who Couldn’t Wait to Leave Their Florida Employer Before Illegally Competing Ordered to Pay Heavy Price

Fisher Phillips on

A Florida Circuit Court judge sternly rebuked two former employees of a private South Florida provider of Autism treatment services who began competing illegally with a new employer – while still employed with their old...more

CDF Labor Law LLP

[Webinar] What’s the Deal? - California Employment Law Issues in Business Transactions and Restructurings - May 24th, 9:30 am -...

CDF Labor Law LLP on

CDF Labor Law LLP presents a complimentary webinar that will cover California employment law issues that arise in business transactions and restructurings. Please join CDF employment law attorneys John Giovannone, Erin Owen,...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

Illinois Supreme Court Rules Privacy Act Claims Have Five Year Statute of Limitations

On February 2, 2023, the Supreme Court of the State of Illinois ruled that all claims under Section 15 of the state’s Biometric Information Privacy Act (Privacy Act or BIPA) have a five year statute of limitations. The...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Trade Secret Misappropriation: Denial of Motion for Attorneys’ Fees under CUTSA is Not an Appealable Order

Whether a court order is appealable is often the first issue analyzed by appellate attorneys. An interlocutory order is an order issued by a court while a case is pending. These orders are not a final disposition of the case,...more

McAfee & Taft

When is hiring a competitor’s employee ‘racketeering’?

McAfee & Taft on

When hiring new employees – especially those who are currently employed or who recently have been employed by a competing company or organization – it’s always a best practice to ask them if they are subject to an employment...more

Burr & Forman

COBRA Litigation – 2020’s Latest Gift

Burr & Forman on

The Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (“COBRA”) became law on April 7, 1986. For most of its nearly 35-year history, litigation involving COBRA has been relatively quiet. Most COBRA claims are tag-alongs, added...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Everything You Need to Know (And Probably Don’t) About Covenants Not to Compete - Louisiana

The next state in our series exploring non-compete agreements is Texas’ neighbor to the east, Louisiana. As I like to say, when you travel east and cross the Sabine River from Texas to Louisiana all the words change but the...more

BCLP

Bonne nouvelle pour le barème Macron : la cour d’appel de Paris emboite le pas de la Cour de cassation

BCLP on

Dans la foulée de l’avis rendu par la Cour de cassation le 17 juillet 2019, la cour d’appel de Paris, par un arrêt du 30 octobre 2019, valide à son tour le barème Macron.   Ce dispositif légal, qui plafonne les indemnités...more

Burns & Levinson LLP

Damages and Liquidated Damages in Restrictive Covenants

Burns & Levinson LLP on

When seeking to enforce a restrictive covenant, whether a noncompete or a nonsolicit, the standard play-book calls for an aggrieved party to file suit and seek a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to...more

Holland & Knight LLP

“Head Start” Damages Affirmed Against Employee Who Started Competitor in China

Holland & Knight LLP on

An often sought remedy in trade secret cases is unjust enrichment, which DTSA and several uniform state trade secret acts permit plaintiffs to seek for the unlawful benefit received by defendants "that is not addressed in...more

Orrick - Trade Secrets Group

Two Wrongs Don’t Make a Right – Trade Secrets Saga Concludes With No Damages Awarded

On Wednesday, a federal jury in the Eastern District of Texas declined to award any damages to Huawei Technologies Co., the world’s largest telecommunications company, stemming from its allegations of trade secret theft,...more

Winstead PC

Court Rules On Lost Profits, Lost Good Will, Disgorgement, and Forfeiture Remedies Against A Former Employee For Breach of...

Winstead PC on

In Samuel D. Orbison & Am. Piping Inspection v. Ma-Tex Rope Co., a jury found that a former employee breached fiduciary duties by working for a competitor while being employed by the plaintiff. No. 06-17-00112-CV, 2018 Tex....more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

In Case Alleging Nationwide Pharmacy Fraud, Kmart Scores Narrow Settlement

As described in an April 17, 2018 article originally posted on the Sheppard Mullin Richter and Hampton, LLP False Claims Act Defense Blog, Kmart Corporation and the U.S. Department of Justice entered into a False Claims Act...more

Butler Snow LLP

Arming Employers Against Internal Hackers, the 11th Circuit Clarifies CFAA’s “Loss” Requirement

Butler Snow LLP on

The Eleventh Circuit ruled last week in a wrongful discharge turned Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”) case, spinning the employee’s case against his employer on its head. The facts of Brown Jordan International, Inc. v....more

Nossaman LLP

Ninth Circuit Issues Two Recent Decisions Further Definining Liability Under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act

Nossaman LLP on

In July, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued two decisions by which it intends to clarify liability under the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030 (“CFAA”). The CFAA imposes criminal penalties and...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Texas Appellate Court Affirms Injunctive Relief and $2.8 Million Award in Attorney’s Fees Against Former Employee in Trade Secret...

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

A Texas Court of Appeals held on August 22, 2016, that a former employer was entitled to $2.8 million in attorney’s fees against a former employee who used the employer’s information to compete against it. The Court reached...more

Winstead PC

Court Reverses Summary Judgment On Breach Of Fiduciary Duty Claim Against Corporate Director

Winstead PC on

In E&E Serv. & Supply v. Ruddick, a corporation sued a former employee who formed a competing business. No. 11-14-00055-CV, 2016 Tex. App. LEXIS 7514 (Tex. App.—Eastland July 14, 2016, no pet. history). The trial court...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Ex-Employee Hit With Six-Figure Judgment For Violating His Non-Competition Agreement By Helping His Son Compete

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

A long-running non-compete clause dispute has reached the Louisiana Court of Appeal three times. Last month, the court affirmed a $600,000 judgment, plus attorneys’ fees and costs, against an ex-employee who assisted his...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Getting Your Money Back: New Jersey Employers Can Disgorge A Disloyal Employee’s Salary

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

In a recent ruling, the New Jersey Supreme Court gave employers a great recourse for dealing with former employees who breach their duty of loyalty. In Bruce Kaye v. Alan P. Rosefielde, the Court allowed an employer to...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Florida’s CADRA a Powerful New Data Protection

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Florida businesses will soon have an important and powerful new legal cause of action to combat unauthorized access to protected computer systems or data by employees, former employees, directors, officers, and others....more

22 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide