In Raymond Edwards II vs. Arthur Andersen, the California Supreme Court has broadly interpreted the California Business and Professions Code to further prohibit employee noncompetition agreements which seek to prevent a former employee from working for a competitor, subject to specific statutory exceptions.Continue Reading Ninth Circuit Report: Raymond Edwards II v. Arthur Andersen LLP
Trade Secrets
California Court of Appeals Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Trade Secrets/16600 Case
In World Financial Group, Inc. v. HBW Insurance & Financial Services, Inc. the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District rejected an Anti-SLAPP motion to strike in a breach of contract, theft of trade secrets, and unfair competition case. The defendants moved to strike the complaint under the Anti-SLAPP statute, claiming that their activities in soliciting the customers and employees of their previous employer were protected speech involving a “matter of public interest,” to whit, their pursuit of employment under the public policies expressed in California Business and Professions Code section 16600 (California’s prohibition of covenants in restraint of trade). The court upheld the trial court’s denial of the motion, finding that solicitation of customers in a business context was not protected activity for the purposes of anti-SLAPP.
Continue Reading California Court of Appeals Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Trade Secrets/16600 Case
Questions Unanswered: The Application of California’s New Trade Secret Jury Instructions
In December, 2007, the California Judicial Council published sample jury instructions for trade secret misappropriation claims. Some of the instructions were revised and others added in April, 2008 (the Table of Contents directs the reader down to Section 4400 of the instructions entitled “Trade Secret”). The instructions raise a number of interesting unanswered questions that are likely to be faced in litigation leading up to, or following, their use.Continue Reading Questions Unanswered: The Application of California’s New Trade Secret Jury Instructions
Trade Secrets Can Be All In Your Mind
In Al Minor & Associates, Inc. v. Martin, 117 Ohio St.3d 58, 2008-Ohio-292, the Ohio Supreme Court recently held that memorizing information, including specifically client lists, constitutes trade secret misappropriation. The court found that neither the Uniform Trade Secret Act nor the Ohio legislature "intended to distinguish between information that has been reduced to some tangible form and some information that has been memorized." Continue Reading Trade Secrets Can Be All In Your Mind
Work Computers and Personal Privacy: Mutually Exclusive or Co-Existent?
Just about every company has the provision in its employee handbook that its employees have no expectation of privacy when using computers provided by the employer. However, to what extent these provisions are enforceable differs between jurisdictions.Continue Reading Work Computers and Personal Privacy: Mutually Exclusive or Co-Existent?
Ensuring Compliance With Changes To The FRCP
On December 1, 2006, several amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ("FRCP") will become effective. The changes that deal directly with electronically stored information ("ESI") will likely affect the means, method, and timing of discovery. Selected amendments to the FRCP are discussed below:
Continue Reading Ensuring Compliance With Changes To The FRCP
The Cost Of Non-Compliance
Today, more than ever, companies are confronted with a broad array of electronic document issues, including data retention policies and e-discovery during litigation. Failing to comply with rules regarding such…
Continue Reading The Cost Of Non-Compliance