Last week, Google said it was no longer going to enforce its anti-poaching provision that includes in its employment contracts.  I don’t see them going anywhere as it relates to Texas employers/employees.

Under Texas law, an anti-poaching provision has to satisfy the Texas non-compete statute meaning it has to be ancillary to an otherwise

At the outset of most employment relationships, the employer will have an employee sign a litany of documents ranging from a IRS form W4 to a non-compete agreement.  Buried within those documents is usually some form of a confidentiality agreement.  Within the agreement the employee agrees not to share any of the employer’s confidential information while an employee and after they depart.  Sometimes the agreement is referred to as a non-disclosure agreement or NDA.  Here is an example of a clause from such an agreement:

Continue Reading

I recently finished a hard fought non-compete case that settled the day before trial.  Unlike most non-compete cases that resolve themselves early on during the temporary injunction fight, this non-compete contained a liquidated damages provision that specified the damage number in the event of a non-compete breach.  The terms of the non-compete prevented the employer from seeking injunctive relief – the only remedy was the liquidated damages clause. The trial court ruled the non-compete was enforceable and the amount of the liquidated damages provision was never challenged.  Even with those rulings/facts the case dragged on to the point of trial.


Continue Reading

Non-compete cases that are well lawyered should be resolved early in the litigation process.  Why do I say that?  If the plaintiff is an aggressive former employer it will in most instances move for a temporary restraining order followed by an application for a temporary injunction in Texas state court.  In that process a lot of things can happen.  First, the parties will have appeared before a judge and gotten a flavor for how the judge will rule and what the judge thinks of each parties’ claims and defenses.  Second, there may be expedited discovery including document productions and depositions.  The judge may even order the case to mediation to avoid having to spend court time on a temporary injunction hearing – which is like a mini-trial.


Continue Reading

The purpose of the performance improvement plan or “PIP” is to give an employee the opportunity to make certain changes in their work performance so as to merit ongoing employment.  Put another way satisfy the PIP and you keep your job. Of course, there are all sorts of statements in the PIP (or there should

The usual gamut of post-employment covenants includes non-compete restrictions, non-solicitation of customer restrictions, confidentiality restrictions, and in many cases the anti-raid provision designed to keep a departing employee from hiring away a former employer’s employees and contractors.  The anti-raid is not always given a lot of thought, but it should be.  Why?  Because when

2016 EEOC Stats

As a lawyer who frequently deals with EEOC charges/responses the EEOC’s yearly statistics always provide some interesting information on what folks are filing claims over these days.  Here is a link to a state by state breakdown of claims in 2016.  So what were some key Texas numbers?  Here are a few:

  1. 9,308 Total

white hatThe details are slim from a recent article from the New York Post about a $3 million dollar non-compete/breach of contract case against a New York City hair stylist.  What we know:

  • Stylist Annie Rush worked at the salon for 6 years;
  • Apparently she is alleged to have signed a 1 year non-compete (that is