As mentioned in a previous blog entry, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held in Comedy Club, Inc. v. Improv West Associates, 553 F.3d 1277 (9th Cir. 2009), that an in-term (during the term of the contract/relationship) covenant not to compete governed by California law was enforceable to the extent that it did not foreclose
Edwards
California Court of Appeal Decision Throws Specific Performance to the Wind for California Businesses Intending To Use Trade Secrets as a Basis to Enforce Covenants Not To Compete
By James D. McNairy on
Posted in Restrictive Covenants
By Kurt Kappes and Jim McNairy
On August 20, 2009, the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District issued an order certifying publication of its decision in The Retirement Group v. Galante, No. D054207, 2009 WL 2332008 (Cal. App. 4th July 30, 2009). In Galante, the Court analyzed the tension between California’s strong public policy favoring competition, as embodied in…
UNHEALTHY COMPETITION – Daily Journal
By Robert B. Milligan on
Posted in Non-Compete Enforceability
April 02, 2009
Daily Journal Reprinted and/or posted with the permission of Daily Journal Corp. (2009).
By Robert Milligan and Nicholas Waddles
The California Supreme Court’s decision in Edwards v. Arthur Andersen LLP, 44 Cal.4th 937 (2008), reaffirmed that employee non-competition agreements are void in California unless they fall within narrow exceptions to Business and Professions Code …
An excellent analysis of California Law Post-Edwards
By Michael Fucci on
Posted in Restrictive Covenants
Our own Robert Milligan and Damon Anastasia published an oustanding article in the California Lawyer on the status of the law in California on non-competition agreements in light of Edwards v. Arthur Anderson. The article is publicly available here.Continue Reading An excellent analysis of California Law Post-Edwards