Enacted in 2018, the Massachusetts Noncompetition Agreement Act (the “Act”) restricted employers’ use of non-competition agreements in a variety of ways, including requiring compensation during the post-employment restricted period and prohibiting enforcement against non-exempt employees or those terminated without cause. While the Act explicitly excludes covenants not to solicit from its definition of noncompetition agreements
The use of social media sites, like LinkedIn, can be a helpful tool to reach a customer base. But a recent district court case out of Minnesota exemplifies the need to ensure that LinkedIn usage complies with the user’s employment agreement. Specifically, in late July 2017, a Minnesota court in Mobile Mini, Inc. v. Vevea
Nevada’s Assembly Bill 276, which became effective on June 3, 2017 (the “NV Law”), articulates new rules and requirements for employee restrictive covenants, some of which fundamentally alter the State’s prior practices. The NV Law addresses consideration generally in non-competition covenants and in circumstances where employees are terminated as the result of a reduction of
Illinois employers are still reeling from the Illinois Supreme Court’s refusal to review the decision in Fifield v. Premier Dealer Services, Inc., No. 1-12-0327 (Ill. App. Ct., 1st Dist. June 24, 2013). In Fifield, the First District Appellate Court ruled that employee non-competition and non-solicitation agreements supported by consideration consisting of less than