Four AMN recruiters left AMN to join Aya.

One of the toughest tasks facing California businesses is preventing their employees from leaving the company and going to work for competitors or starting their own competing businesses.

Anti-not to compete legislation H.F. No. 506 was introduced in the Minnesota House of Representatives on February 11 that would, if enacted, broadly void "any contract that prohibits a party to that contract from exercising a lawful profession, trade, or business" except in three specific instances:

In our previous post on October 23 2023, we discussed A.B. 1076, which makes important changes to California Business & Professions Code Section 16600.

We reported last month concerning California's new non-compete law that furthers the state's protections for employee mobility and seeks to void out of state employee non-compete agreements.

California clarified its prohibition against noncompete covenants for California-based employees to void any such covenants that were signed outside of California...

In Samuelian v. Life Generations Healthcare, LLC, — Cal. App. 5th —, 2024 WL 3878448 (Cal. App. Aug. 20, 2024), the California Court of Appeal answered two long outstanding questions of California law...

California recently enacted two bills — SB 699 and AB 1076 — amending and adding to Section 16600 of the California Business and Professions Code to broaden the scope of California's...

The U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision today overturning the conviction of a commercial fisherman who was prosecuted under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act for throwing undersized red grouper overboard.

Among the many changes embodied in the recently enacted Federal Rules of Civil Procedure dealing with electronic discovery, perhaps none was passed with more controversy than the "safe harbor provision" contained in Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(f), which protects parties under certain circumstances from sanctions for the loss or alteration of electronically stored information.

On November 19, 2009, a California Court of Appeal published a decision continuing the trend against enforcement of non-competition clauses in California. In Dowell v. Biosense Webster, Inc., 09 C.D.O.S. 13991, the Second Appellate District affirmed a finding that non-compete and non-solicitation agreements not narrowly constructed only to protect trade secrets are void under California law.

Nearly three years ago, the California Supreme Court handed down a decision that underscored California's longstanding prohibition of employee noncompete agreements, Edwards v. Arthur Andersen, LLP, 44 Cal.4th 937 (2008).

We have seen a rise in employees going on the offensive and suing their former employers for damages for not informing them that their noncompete is invalid under the applicable state law...

On September 1, 2023, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law SB 699, which amends California Business & Professions Code Section 16600 to prohibit employers...

The United States Supreme Court recently entered the latest of a series of opinions that prevent state courts from interfering with arbitration on state policy grounds.

Two recent cases have determined the use of employee nonsolicitation clauses in employment agreements to be unlawful in the state of California. Any employer with California employees,

In February 2023, new legislation was proposed in the California State Assembly that, if adopted and signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom

Personalized medicine companies should implement new strategies to deal with the challenges associated with protecting their inventions.