A man wants free whoppers for life after getting locked in a Burger King bathroom and he has filed a lawsuit to get them. Funny as this lawsuit is, it raises many of the same questions that I get from my clients in some of the most complicated contractual disputes, so I thought I’d address some of the most common questions in this post.
Unlike many other states around the country, Texas did not see any drastic changes in its non-competition laws in 2018. However, out of a 100 + cases involving non-competition disputes, the following handful stand out either because they addressed a novel issue or clarified an area of confusion in this gray area of the law.
What distinguishes those companies that are successful in enforcing their non-compete agreements from those that are not? Generally speaking, just three factors: good agreements, evidence of violations, and swift action to enforce.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that: (1) a party must “prevail” before it can recover any attorney’s fees under the Defend Trade Secrets Act and (2) a plaintiff’s dismissal of its claims without prejudice does not confer the “prevailing party” status on defendants.
A confusing, ambiguous, or imprecise non-compete agreement will yield poor results in court. In other words: garbage in, garbage out.
Many small businesses use Google, Microsoft 360, Dropbox or some other similar systems to maintain and manage company records. All of those systems allow the administrator to (1) set restrictions on which employees can access which information within the company; (2) track what the employees do with that information; (3) set restrictions on whether the employees can print, download, copy or share the information with other employees or people outside the company; (4) periodically change passwords to access the system; and (5) many other features that can help business owners prevent their information being shared outside the company.