What the Delaware McDonald's Decision Means for Corporate Officers and Compliance Programs
One Month to a More Effective Compliance Program with Boards - Day 1 - Legal Requirements of the Board Regarding Compliance
Nonprofit Quick Tips: Secretary of State Filings in California and Delaware
Compliance into the Weeds - McDonald’s and Duty of Corporate Officer Oversight
A Compliance Officer Turned Board Member's Advice
In Cleveland Integrity Services, LLC v. Byers (Del. Ch. Feb. 28, 2025), the Delaware Court of Chancery declined to enforce a two-year non-compete agreement that it found to be geographically overbroad and refused to narrow or...more
A notable trend has emerged in Delaware with respect to the enforceability of non-competes – while once considered a management-friendly jurisdiction, two recent decisions demonstrate a marked shift towards a closer scrutiny...more
In a recent en banc decision, Delaware’s Supreme Court upheld a key tool available to employers to enforce forfeiture-for-competition provisions against former employees. Delaware’s Chancery Court has shown an increasing...more
A recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit allowed an employer to enforce a “forfeiture-for-competition” against a former plant manager. The Court explained that, under Delaware law, forfeiture-for...more
In Gilbert v. Unisys Corp., the Delaware Court of Chancery held that two former employees with the title of Vice President were entitled to advancement of litigation expenses brought by the corporation, despite the fact that...more
In line with the national trend making noncompetes more difficult to enforce, a number of Delaware courts have recently refused to “blue pencil” overbroad noncompetition agreements and have stricken them in their entirety. As...more