The Texas Supreme Court has issued an opinion this morning holding that noncompetition agreements supported by stock options and good will are not unenforceable as a matter of law. I previewed this case here. As I have time to digest the majority, concurring and dissenting opinions, I’ll provide more thoughts on this case. You
restrictive covenants
Supreme Court of Texas Grants Review in Stock-Options Noncompete Case
Last summer, I detailed the Dallas Court of Appeals’ decision in Marsh USA, Inc. v. Cook where the court held a noncompetition agreement supported only by stock-options as consideration was unenforceable. You can read that post here. Today, the Supreme Court of Texas announced that it would hear the appeal from the Dallas Court of Appeals. You can…
San Antonio Court of Appeals Holds Doctrine of Unclean Hands Doesn’t Invalidate Noncompetition Agreement
In an unpublished opinion, the San Antonio Court of Appeals held that a former employee cannot avoid the effects of a noncompetition agreement under the doctrine of unclean hands, as a matter of law, when the inequitable conduct the employee complains of is separate from the issue in dispute. (Opinion available here).
Covenants Not to Compete that Contain Implicit Promises to Provide Confidential Information are Enforceable
On April 17, 2009, the Supreme Court of Texas continued its trend of finding ways to enforce covenants not to compete in the employment context. In Mann Frankfort Stein & Lipp Advisors, Inc. v. Fielding, the Court considered "whether a covenant not to compete in an at-will employment agreement is enforceable when the employee expressly…