Class Action | Eleventh Circuit Reinstates No Hire Antitrust Claims Against Burger King
As we previously reported, California recently enacted AB 1076, which reinforces the state’s broad statutory ban on noncompete agreements. The law took effect on January 1, 2024, and expressly codifies Edwards v. Arthur...more
In Louisiana, restrictive covenants—known locally as “no competes”—are unenforceable by statutory default. The applicable statute declares, “Every contract or agreement, or provision thereof, by which anyone is restrained...more
A federal appellate court held that Burger King and its franchisees may violate Section 1 of the Sherman Act (antitrust) by engaging in concerted action when entering into “no-hire” agreements. The appellate court reversed...more
The Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ) has stepped up enforcement over no-poach/no-hire agreements under Federal antitrust laws. The DOJ recently tried two criminal cases against individual officers of...more
In a recent decision and case of first impression, Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court unanimously affirmed that a no-hire of employees provision between a business and its vendor was unenforceable because it constituted an...more
In a decision resolving a dispute that has been pending for nearly five years, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania just voided a no-hire provision entered into by two companies that bound one of them from hiring former...more
Do you typically include a “no rehire” clause in your settlements with soon to be former employees? How about agreements with other companies that you will not “poach” each other’s employees? If your answer to either of those...more
Executive Summary: The Georgia Restrictive Covenants Act (O.C.G.A. § 13-8-50, et seq.) (“RCA”) governs restrictive covenant agreements in Georgia entered into after May 2011. The RCA expressly addresses non-compete,...more
On May 28, 2019, the Maryland Governor permitted (without signature) the Noncompete and Conflict of Interest Clauses Act (the Act) to become law. ...more
The 2019 legal landscape of employee mobility continues to evolve, at times drastically. Courts and legislatures are giving increased scrutiny to employers’ claims to protect the confidentiality of their trade secrets and...more
Countless companies contract with other companies to provide services and include a “no hire” provision (pursuant to which the parties to the contract agree to not hire employees of the contracting company) in the service...more
Back in 2015, we covered the divided holding of the Ninth Circuit in Golden v. California Emergency Physicians Medical Group, that a “no re-hire” provision in a settlement agreement could constitute a restraint of trade in...more
Jimmy John’s will face antitrust claims, after an Illinois federal judge declined to dismiss allegations in a class action. Plaintiffs claim the chain’s franchise agreement harmed competition by preventing franchisee...more
Fifteen months after the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced its intention to criminally pursue no-poaching agreements — in which competitors agree not to recruit or hire each other’s employees —...more
The law in California is well settled that, with few exceptions, non-compete agreements are unenforceable. Less clear is whether and to what extent employee non-solicitation and no-hire agreements can withstand a court’s...more
A very recent federal court decision, A.H. Harris & Sons, Inc. v. Naso, 2015 WL 1420132 (D.Conn.), illustrates how judges weigh various facts when deciding to grant or deny a preliminary injunction in a restrictive covenant...more