A recent trial court decision from Superior Court Judge Tommy Hankinson of the Griffin Judicial Circuit illustrates one of the many difficulties of enforcing a non-compete provision in Georgia. Specifically, the case – Turner v. Peachtree Fayette Women’s Specialists, LLC, Civil Action File No. 2009V-0746, slip op. (2009) – illustrates that when an employer drafts the geographic scope of a
Michael Elkon
IBM v. Johnson: The Saga Continues
By Michael Elkon on
Posted in Non-Compete Enforceability
When we last wrote about IBM’s efforts to enjoin David Johnson, its former Vice President of Corporate Development, from joining Dell, Judge Stephen Robinson of the Southern District of New York had denied IBM’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction following a June 22, 2009 preliminary injunction hearing, and IBM had filed an interlocutory appeal. On June 24, 2009, IBM filed
First Apple, Now Dell: IBM Pursues a Departing Executive
By Michael Elkon on
Posted in Non-Compete Enforceability
In the wake of its ultimately successful efforts to obtain an injunction against former executive Mark Papermaster following Papermaster’s move to Apple, IBM recently sought to enjoin David Johnson from joining Dell. Johnson, who was IBM’s Vice President of Corporate Development, recently joined Dell as its Senior Vice President of Strategy. After conducting a preliminary injunction hearing, Judge Stephen Robinson of…
Continue Reading First Apple, Now Dell: IBM Pursues a Departing Executive
Georgia Supreme Court Holds that In-term Restrictive Covenants are Subject to Strict Scrutiny
By Michael Elkon on
Posted in Non-Compete Enforceability
In Atlanta Bread Co. Int’l, Inc. v. Lupton-Smith, S08G1815, 2009 WL 1834215 (Ga. Jun. 29, 2009), the Georgia Supreme Court today confirmed that in-term restrictive covenants are subject to the same strict scrutiny standard applied to post-term covenants and the same reasonableness standards of time, territory, and scope.
The question presented in Atlanta Bread Company was whether the…
Inventions Agreements as Unfair Business Practices?
By Michael Elkon on
Posted in Unfair Competition
In Applied Materials, Inc. v. Advanced Micro-Fabrication Equipment (Shanghai) Co., No. C 07-05248 JW, 2009 WL 1481147 (N.D. Cal. May 20, 2009), the Northern District of California held that Applied Materials’ use of inventions agreements constituted unfair business practices under California law. Applied Materials, a California-based semiconductor company, brought claims for trade secret misappropriation and unfair competition…
Continue Reading Inventions Agreements as Unfair Business Practices?
District Court Denies Request for Injunctive Relief in Financial Services Industry Dispute
By Michael Elkon on
Posted in Unfair Competition
In Smith Barney, Inc. v. Darling, No. 09-C-540, 2009 WL 1544756 (E.D. Wis. Jun. 3, 2009), the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin denied Smith Barney’s request for temporary injunctive relief in aid of arbitration against five departing financial consultants and their new employer. Smith Barney sought an injunction to: (1) require the former employees to…
District Court Rejects Employer’s Attempt to Use the Computer Fraud & Abuse Act against Former Employees
By Michael Elkon on
Posted in Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
In Lasco Foods, Inc. v. Hall and Shaw Sales, Marketing & Consulting, LLC, 600 F. Supp. 2d 1045 (E.D. Mo. 2009), the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri dismissed an employer’s claim that two former employees violated the Computer Fraud & Abuse Act (“CFAA”), 18 U.S.C. § 1030, et seq., by deleting information from…
Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Addresses whether Software can be a Trade Secret as a Total Compilation
By Michael Elkon on
Posted in Trade Secrets
In Decision Insights, Inc. v. Sentia Group, Inc., No. 07-1596, 2009 WL 367585 (4th Cir. Feb. 4, 2009), the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals grappled with the distinction between a claim that elements of a software program are trade secrets and a claim that the program is a trade secret as a total compilation. The Court of Appeals determined…
Dunder Mifflin v. Michael Scott
By Michael Elkon on
Posted in Espionage, Trade Secrets
Roughly two months ago, we wrote about Michael Scott and Dwight Schrute, two fictional characters on NBC’s sit-com The Office, stealing the trade secrets of a competitor: Prince Paper. On last Thursday night’s episode, we learned the fate of Prince Paper: it went out of business. (5:35 into the linked clip.) Is this a result of Dunder Mifflin…
Continue Reading Dunder Mifflin v. Michael Scott
The Doctor is Out: Georgia Court of Appeals Upholds Enforcement of Non-compete Provision
By Michael Elkon on
Posted in Non-Compete Enforceability
In Azzouz v. Prime Pediatrics, P.C., Case No. A08A2340, 2009 WL 619189 (Ga. App. Mar. 12, 2009), the Georgia Court of Appeals upheld a trial court’s grant of an interlocutory injunction on behalf of Prime Pediatrics, P.C. against Dr. Rami Azzouz. Dr. Azzouz entered into a detailed non-competition provision upon the commencement of his employment with Prime. The provision is as…