A little less than a year ago, businesses were scrambling to get ready for the then-impending Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) final rule that would have blocked nearly all non-compete agreements between employers and...more
A business dispute in Michigan may provide insight into the consideration required to support a noncompete contract restricting future employment. Innovation Ventures, LLC v. Liquid Manufacturing, LLC, No. 150591, Michigan...more
As many of our readers may recall, the Illinois Appellate Court in the First District dramatically changed (in our view) the law two years ago in its infamous Fifield decision, by holding that if employment (or continuing...more
On April 30, 2015, the Wisconsin Supreme Court took a stand on a hot-button for employers by holding that continued at-will employment is legal consideration that will support a reasonably drafted restrictive covenant signed...more
In the last issue of The Fast Laner, we reported that the Illinois Court of Appeals, Third District, followed Fifield v. Premier Dealer Servs. and held that, in the absence of other consideration, continued at-will employment...more
On February 6, 2015, the U. S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in Chicago rejected the bright-line rule, created by the Illinois Appellate Court in the often maligned Fifield v. Premier Dealer Servs.,...more
The enforceability of post-employment restrictive covenants in Illinois suffered a set back on October 14, 2013, when the Illinois Supreme Court refused to review an appellate decision that held that two years of employment...more