A recent decision in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York held that a noncompetition agreement that prohibited a former executive, whose office was in California, from competing anywhere in the world was enforceable because it was necessary to protect the former employer’s trade secret information. Estee Lauder Companies, Inc. v. Batra, F.Supp.2d, No. 06 CIV 2035, 2006 WL 1188183 (S.D.N.Y. May 4, 2006).

While restrictive covenant cases invariably depend upon the facts of the specific case, this holding is favorable to companies with a global presence that are concerned about being able to enforce restrictive covenants with a worldwide scope. The holding is also favorable to employers that are located outside of California and seek to enforce restrictive covenants in California.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]