By: Shabbi S. Khan, Natasha Allen, David W. Kantaros, Chanley T. Howell, Graham P. MacEwan, and Avi B. Ginsberg, FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
THIS ARTICLE DISCUSSES KEY CONSIDERATIONS IN MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS...
By: Kirk A. Sigmon BANNER WITCOFF
THIS ARTICLE DISCUSSES PATENTING ARTIFICIAL (AI), MACHING LEARNING (ML), AND RELATED INVENTIONS.
It provides a high-level overview of AI and ML, offers tips for drafting...
By: Rose J. Hunter Jones, Kassi R. Burns, and Meredith A. Perlman, KING & SPALDING
THIS ARTICLE DISCUSSES BEST PRACTICES AND STRATEGIC INSIGHTS LITIGATORS SHOULD CONSIDER IN A FEDERAL COURT LITIGATION...
By: Practical Guidance Real Estate, Construction, and Finance Attorney Teams
PRACTICAL GUIDANCE RECENTLY COMPLETED ITS ANNUAL PRIVATE MARKET DATA REAL ESTATE SURVEY. This survey, which ran from August...
By: D. Reed Freeman Jr., ARENTFOX SCHIFF LLP
THIS ARTICLE DISCUSSES THE PRINCIPLE OF DATA MINIMIZATION in the context of commercial applications of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) technology...
Copyright © 2024 LexisNexis and/or its Licensors.
By: Daniel Turinsky, Evan D. Parness, and Britt C. Hamilton, DLA Piper LLP (US)
This article provides guidance on substantive and procedural considerations involved in pursuing temporary restraining orders (TROs) and preliminary injunctive relief to help protect employer trade secrets and enforce restrictive covenants against former employees.
FOR EMPLOYERS, RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS HAVE BECOME a vital tool for protecting confidential information, trade secrets, client goodwill, and other important business interests. Just as vital is knowing how to effectively protect those interests through litigation if necessary. Successfully enjoining restrictive covenant breaches or misappropriations of trade secrets (or both) requires a coherent litigation strategy and careful consideration of numerous procedural and substantive issues.
This article addresses the following considerations regarding TROs and preliminary injunctions in connection with restrictive covenants and trade secret misappropriation:
To read the full practice note in Lexis Practice Advisor, follow this link.
Daniel Turinsky is a partner in the Employment group of DLA Piper LLP (US) and is based in the firm’s New York City office. His practice focuses on the representation of employers in litigation before federal and state courts, administrative agencies, and arbitration panels. His litigation experience encompasses a wide range of employmentrelated matters, including discrimination, harassment, and retaliation claims; wage and hour class and collective actions; disputes involving the enforcement of employment contracts, confidentiality agreements, and non-competition covenants; consumer class actions relating to employer pre-employment screening processes; and tort claims arising out of the employment relationship, such as fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, tortious interference, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and defamation. Evan D. Parness, a partner in the New York office of DLA Piper LLP (US), represents employers and senior executives in all aspects of employment-related litigation and disputes before federal and state courts, administrative agencies, and alternative dispute resolution bodies. His experience includes defense of claims of discrimination, retaliation, and harassment; disputes involving the enforcement of employment contracts and non-competition covenants; and tort claims arising out of the employment relationship, such as breach of fiduciary duty, unfair competition, and tortious interference. Evan also advises clients on a broad variety of employment-related matters, including terminations and other disciplinary actions, employment and separation agreements, investigations of alleged discrimination, harassment and other employee misconduct, employment policies and practices, and litigation avoidance. Britt C. Hamilton is an associate in DLA Piper’s New York office. He represents employers and senior executives in all aspects of employment-related litigation before federal and state courts, administrative agencies, arbitration panels, and other alternative dispute resolution bodies.
For more detail on state law issues related to restrictive covenants, see
> NON-COMPETES AND TRADE SECRET PROTECTION STATE PRACTICE NOTES CHART
RESEARCH PATH: Labor & Employment > Noncompetes and Trade Secret Protection > Restrictive Covenants > Practice Notes
For a list of relevant state-law forms, see
> NON-COMPETES AND TRADE SECRET PROTECTION STATE EXPERT FORMS CHART
RESEARCH PATH: Labor & Employment > Noncompetes and Trade Secret Protection > Restrictive Covenants > Forms
For more information on seeking temporary restraining orders (TROs), see
> TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDERS: SEEKING A TRO (FEDERAL)
RESEARCH PATH: Civil Litigation > Pretrial Injunctive and Other Provisional Relief > Practice Notes
For more information on seeking preliminary injunctions (PIs), see
> PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIONS: SEEKING A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION (FEDERAL)
For step-by-step guidance on seeking TROs and preliminary injunctive relief in federal court, see
> PRETRIAL INJUNCTIVE RELIEF: SEEKING A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER OR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION CHECKLIST (FEDERAL)
RESEARCH PATH: Civil Litigation > Pretrial Injunctive and Other Provisional Relief > Checklists
For a discussion of how to oppose TROs and preliminary injunctive relief in federal court, see
> PRETRIAL INJUNCTIVE RELIEF: OPPOSING A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER OR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION (FEDERAL)
For information on each federal circuit court standard, see
> PRETRIAL INJUNCTIVE RELIEF STANDARDS (FEDERAL)
For information on protectable interests, see
> RESTRICTIVE COVENANT BASICS, INCLUDING ADEQUATE CONSIDERATION, PROTECTABLE INTERESTS, GEOGRAPHIC AND TIME RESTRICTIONS, AND PERMISSIBLE SCOPE
RESEARCH PATH: Labor & Employment > Non-competes and Trade Secret Protection > Restrictive Covenants > Practice Notes