Washington Governor Jay Inslee recently signed Senate Bill 5935 into law, amending and expanding Washington’s statute restricting the enforceability of noncompetition covenants (Revised Code of Washington 49.2). The amended statute, effective June 6, 2024 and enacted to “facilitat[e] workforce mobility and protect[] employees and independent contractors,” follows a growing trend among states restricting the enforceability of noncompetition covenants and creates additional considerations for employers entering into non-compete agreements with Washington-based employees.Continue Reading Washington’s Amended Non-Compete Law Creates New Considerations for Employers
Restrictive covenants
What the FTC’s Noncompete Ban Means for Healthcare
On April 23, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) issued its Final Rule banning employers from imposing post-employment noncompete requirements on their workers (the “Final Rule”). The FTC has indicated that it will continue to prioritize enforcement in the healthcare industry, with objectives seeming to include alleviating physician shortages and improving access to healthcare. What the Final Rule means for healthcare organizations generally, and for nonprofits in particular, is not entirely clear and is likely to be challenged. Continue Reading What the FTC’s Noncompete Ban Means for Healthcare
FTC Votes to Ban Noncompete Agreements
On April 23, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (the “FTC”) voted 3-2 to issue its final rule (“Final Rule”) banning employers from imposing noncompete clauses on their workers, approving the final rule in a special Open Commission Meeting. Continue Reading FTC Votes to Ban Noncompete Agreements
Delaware Supreme Court Enforces Forfeiture for Competition Provision in Partnership Agreement
In Cantor Fitzgerald, L.P. v. Ainslie, No. 162, 2023, 2024 WL 315193 (Del. Jan. 29, 2024), the Delaware Supreme Court held enforceable a “forfeiture for competition” provision in a limited partnership agreement, upholding “the freedom of contract” and enforcing “as a matter of fundamental public policy the voluntary agreements of sophisticated parties.” Given Delaware’s recent shift from its typically non-compete friendly stance, the Delaware Supreme Court’s ruling is beneficial for employers.Continue Reading Delaware Supreme Court Enforces Forfeiture for Competition Provision in Partnership Agreement
New York Amends Its Release Agreement Law for the Third Time
On November 17, 2023, New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed a new law that further limits the terms employers may include in release agreements relating to claims of harassment, discrimination, and retaliation. The law took effect immediately and further broadens the restrictions on release agreements already contained in New York General Obligations Law Section 5-336 (“Section 5-336”).Continue Reading New York Amends Its Release Agreement Law for the Third Time
Necessity Is the Mother of Invention – But New York Law Says Employers Better Not Take the Credit
On September 15, 2023, New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed a law that made dramatic changes to the enforceability of invention assignment provisions in employment agreements and likely in related agreements including offer letters and Confidentiality, Information and Invention Assignment Agreements (CIIAAs). The law took effect immediately and adds New York to a growing list of states with laws placing limits on invention assignment provisions.Continue Reading Necessity Is the Mother of Invention – But New York Law Says Employers Better Not Take the Credit
California Strengthens Non-Competition Law
California has passed two new items of legislation, Senate Bill 699 and Assembly Bill 1076, which will further regulate and restrict the enforcement of employment non-compete agreements in California, and expand the scope of remedies for those affected by them. These new laws will become effective on January 1, 2024, and now is the time for employers to assess and revise their employment-related agreements and restrictive covenants accordingly. As detailed below, they also require employers to notify employees and certain former employees by February 15, 2024 that certain non-compete provisions are void. The two new laws are detailed below.Continue Reading California Strengthens Non-Competition Law
Time for Employers to Modify Minnesota Protective Covenant Templates
For those employers who have not yet modified their Minnesota employment and non-compete templates, the time is now. Pursuant to MN SF 3035, as of July 1, 2023, Minnesota employers are prohibited from entering into post-employment non-compete agreements with employees and individual independent contractors. Continue Reading Time for Employers to Modify Minnesota Protective Covenant Templates
Buyer Beware: Delaware Courts Continue to Refuse to Enforce Deal-Based Non-Competes
In a blog earlier this year, we discussed the Delaware Chancery Court’s refusal to enforce a sale of business non-compete in Kodiak Building Partners, LLC v Adams. We wondered then whether Kodiak represented a one-off decision or whether it augured a trend that might give buyers of businesses pause. Delaware courts seem to have answered the question. In what constitutes a notable trend for buyers of businesses, Delaware courts have twice more refused to enforce non-competes under a sale of a business analysis. Continue Reading Buyer Beware: Delaware Courts Continue to Refuse to Enforce Deal-Based Non-Competes
The End of Non-Competes in New York? State Legislature Passes Non-Compete Ban Moving One Step Closer to the Edge
Executive Summary
A sweeping bill that would effectively ban all newly entered non-compete agreements (and potentially impact provisions and agreements that act as a de facto non-compete) for all employees, regardless of wage or income level, is heading to New York Governor Kathy Hochul’s desk.Continue Reading The End of Non-Competes in New York? State Legislature Passes Non-Compete Ban Moving One Step Closer to the Edge
Missed Assignments: The Importance of Assignability Clauses in Restrictive Covenant Agreements
Imagine paying millions to acquire a company only to later discover the restrictive covenants in the employment agreements of high-level executives were unenforceable. That’s precisely what happened in Intertek Asset Integrity Management. In Intertek, Texas’s Twelfth Court of Appeals held a company Vice President’s non-compete was unenforceable by the purchaser-entity because the underlying employment agreement lacked an assignment clause. Such language, if included, would have permitted the seller to transfer the contract’s rights and obligations without the employee’s consent. Assignability clauses are frequently buried in the “miscellaneous” section of agreements and—too often—omitted. Businesses who overlook these terms in Texas employment contracts do so at their peril.Continue Reading Missed Assignments: The Importance of Assignability Clauses in Restrictive Covenant Agreements