New York's highest court imposed important restrictions on anti-competitive agreements among professionals yesterday, ruling that the only justification for imposing a non-competition agreement on employees is to forestall unfair competition. But it also held that a non-competition agreement that is overbroad may be partially enforced, rather than invalidated entirely.
May 14, 1999 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
ALBANY — The Court of Appeals imposed important restrictions on anti-competitive agreements among professionals yesterday, ruling that the only justification for imposing a non-competition agreement on employees “is to forestall unfair competition.”
But it also held that a non-competition agreement that is overbroad may be partially enforced, rather than invalidated entirely.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Atlanta s John Marshall Law School is seeking to hire one or more full-time, visiting Legal WritingInstructors to teach Legal Research, Anal...
Lower Manhattan firm seeks a premises liability litigator (i.e., depositions, SJ motions, and/or trials) with at least 3-6 years of experien...
Evergreen Trading is a media investment firm headquartered in NYC. We help brands achieve their goals by leveraging their unwanted assets to...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
