In this Business Litigation Update, Faruki Ireland & Cox asks for your input on the subject of whether the convenience and expense saving of conducting Rule 16 Case Management Conferences telephonically is worth the price. Dan Donnellon discusses the trade-offs, and invites your comments. Send them via email to Dan Donnellon at email@example.com.
February 6, 2014
In this Business Litigation Update, Faruki Ireland & Cox explores the current controversy of Social Media in discovery. Courts and Commentators have suggested the need for new rules or special discovery requirements. While Ohio courts wait to weigh in, Dan Donnellon discusses the topic.
January 16, 2014
Protection of a company’s competitive advantage is vital. Therefore, it is necessary that employers understand the options available when evaluating how best to protect their company. One common practice is the non-compete agreement.
Generally, a non-compete agreement is a contract between an employer and employee where the employee agrees not to compete with the employer after termination of the employment relationship. Be careful, though, not all states permit non-compete agreements, and those that do recognize varying levels of protection to employers. Ohio is among the states that recognize non-compete agreements as a valid and enforceable means for employers to protect their economic interests – but, the agreement must be reasonable.
What constitutes a “reasonable” non-compete agreement?
In Ohio, a non-compete agreement is reasonable if the agreement: (1) is no greater than is required for the employer’s protection of a legitimate interest; (2) does not impose undue hardship on the employee, and (3) is not injurious to the public. American Bldg. Servs. v. Cohen, 78 Ohio App. 3d 29, 33 (Ohio App. 12th Dist. 1992) (relying on Raimonde v. Van Vlerah).
December 13, 2013