non-solicitation agreements

Subscribe to non-solicitation agreements via RSS
Chambers

We are pleased to share that Seyfarth partner Dawn Mertineit authored the “USA Trends and Developments” section in the recently released Chambers Trade Secrets Global Practice Guide. This highly regarded publication provides timely insights and analysis on the evolving legal landscape of trade secrets law across the globe.

Dawn addresses the growing challenges businesses face in protecting their trade…

Continue Reading Seyfarth’s Dawn Mertineit Authors “USA Trends and Developments” in Chambers Trade Secrets Global Practice Guide
andrew-pons-lylCw4zcA7I-unsplash

Jimmy Buffett once eloquently said that “without geography, you’re nowhere.”  But how does that insight apply to restrictive covenants that lack explicit geographic limitations in Georgia? While Jimmy never got to find out, we now have some much-needed clarity from the Georgia Supreme Court.

For many years, most Georgia litigants, individuals, and businesses operated under the assumption that some restrictive…

Continue Reading Georgia Supreme Court Reverses Lower Court Rulings and Holds Non-Recruitment Provisions do not Need to Contain Explicit Geographic Limitations

In-house attorneys often wear multiple hats when performing work for private companies. Some of their work clearly falls under the provision of legal services, while others can be less clear quasi-business roles. And when those in-house lawyers who perform non-legal work are asked to sign a non-compete agreement in connection with their employment, questions can arise both as to the enforceability of those agreements and whether an attorney violates the rules of professional conduct by signing such an agreement as we have previously discussed.
Continue Reading Another Decision Addressing Non-Competes for In-House Counsel

A law firm can terminate an at-will lawyer who refuses to sign an agreement prohibiting them from soliciting the firm’s customers or clients following cessation of employment, according to the Supreme Court of Kentucky. In Greissman v. Rawlings and Associates, PLLC, the court held that where a non-solicitation agreement included a savings clause which excepted the solicitation of legal work from where “to the extent necessary to comply with the rules of professional responsibility applicable attorneys,” it did not violate those rules as a matter of law. This is consistent with what we have previously written on this issue; so long as there is no restriction on the practice of law, post-employment restrictive covenants do not necessarily run afoul of states’ Rules of Professional Conduct (in most states, Rule 5.6, which is generally intended to protect clients, not attorneys). 
Continue Reading Supreme Court of Kentucky Rules That Firms May Require Lawyers to Sign Non-Solicitation Agreements That Exempt Legal Work