News & Analysis as of September 21, 2024

Non-Compete Agreements › Rule-of-Reason Analysis

+ Follow

Non-Compete Agreements are contracts, typically formed in employment or business purchase contexts, where one party agrees to refrain from engaging in a particular line of work or pursuing business within a certain industry or locale. The purpose of these agreements is to protect employers or business purchasers from competition stemming from former employees or former owners of a business. less -

The FTC Continues to Broaden Its Enforcement Authority to Pursue Chair Khan’s Agenda

Fenwick & West LLP on 11/16/2022

On July 9, 2021, just days into her tenure as Federal Trade Commission (FTC or Commission) Chair, Lina Khan led the Commission’s charge to rescind the agency’s 2015 policy statement (2015 Statement) on its approach to...more

Continued Antitrust Focus on the Labor Market in the Wake of NCAA v. Alston

BakerHostetler on 4/27/2022

Almost one year has passed since the Supreme Court’s unanimous antitrust decision in NCAA v. Alston. That well-publicized decision affirmed the District Court’s rejection of the NCAA’s limits on education-related compensation...more

Department of Justice suggests that employee non-competes could be criminally prosecuted

Hogan Lovells on 3/4/2022

On 25 February the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) submitted a statement of interest in a Nevada State court lawsuit filed by a group of anesthesiologists alleging that non-compete provisions in their employment agreements...more

Ninth Circuit Denies Sherman Act Challenge To No-Poach Provision

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on 9/16/2021

In an important decision on August 19, 2021, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Aya Healthcare Services, Inc. v. AMN Healthcare, Inc. affirmed the grant of summary judgment in favor of AMN, finding that the...more

Ixchel Pharma, LLC v. Biogen, Inc.: Opening the Door to Non-Compete Agreements Between Businesses in California

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP on 12/11/2020

In a recent decision, Ixchel Pharma, LLC v. Biogen, Inc., the Supreme Court of California opened the door for some restrictive covenants between commercial enterprises, but it left alone California law generally prohibiting...more

Franchisor 101: Taking the Red Pill on Non-Competes

Lewitt Hackman on 8/31/2020

Franchisors and franchisees in California have long conducted themselves based on precedent that voids post-termination covenants against competition in a franchise agreement in California. Recently, a franchisor’s ability to...more

Economic Tort of Tortious Interference With At-Will Contractual Relations Requires Allegation of Independent Wrongful Act

Payne & Fears on 8/18/2020

In Ixchel Pharma, LLC v. Biogen, Inc., S256927, 2020 WL 4432623 (Cal. Aug. 3, 2020) (“Ixchel Pharma”), the Supreme Court of California clarified two points: (1) that to state a claim for interference with an at-will contract...more

California Supreme Court Holds Law Restricting Employment Non-Competes Also Applies to Businesses Contracts Under Antitrust Real...

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP on 8/18/2020

In Ixchel Pharma, LLC v. Biogen, Inc., the court addresses “an important question of California law, potentially affecting all contracts in California that in some way restrain a contracting party from engaging in a...more

California Supreme Court Applies Rule of Reason Test for “Business Only” Restrictive Covenants

Epstein Becker & Green on 8/14/2020

In Ixchel Pharma, LLC v. Biogen, Inc., 20 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7729, __ P.3d __(August 3, 2020), the California Supreme Court made it easier for businesses to enforce restrictive covenants against other businesses. This...more

The California Supreme Court Clarifies Section 16600 as Applied to Business Contracts and Holds That an Independently Wrongful Act...

Orrick - Trade Secrets Group on 8/7/2020

The most powerful tool capable of invalidating competitive restraints under California law is Business and Professions Code section 16600. That statute states that “[e]very contract by which anyone is restrained from...more

States Look for New Angle to Fight No-Poach Agreements

Fisher Phillips on 7/18/2018

Attorneys general in ten states and the District of Columbia have recently launched an investigation into the employment practices of eight fast-food franchises. The group sent a joint letter to the companies requesting...more

Shifting Enforcement of No-Poaching Agreements

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP on 4/25/2018

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

Michigan Supreme Court Makes Commercial Non-Compete Agreements Easier to Enforce

Miller Canfield on 3/6/2017

It is now a lot easier to enforce commercial noncompete agreements in Michigan. In its recent decision in Innovation Ventures v. Liquid Manufacturing, a unanimous Michigan Supreme Court holds that commercial noncompete...more

Michigan Supreme Court Holds That the Federal “Rule of Reason” Applies in Evaluating the Enforceability of Noncompete Agreements...

Dickinson Wright on 7/21/2016

The Michigan Antitrust Reform Act (MARA) contains a specific provision, MCL 445.774a, that governs the enforceability of noncompete agreements between employees and employers. MARA does not, however, provide standards for...more

14 Results

View per page

Page: of 1

Non-Compete Agreements › Rule-of-Reason Analysis

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