Corporate,
Civil Litigation,
9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
Jul. 24, 2019
Will the ban on restrictive covenants get even broader?
In what could be an important first step to further expand the already broad reach of Section 16600, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has asked the California Supreme Court to answer the question: “Does section 16600 of the California Business and Professions Code void a contract by which a business is restrained from engaging in a lawful trade or business with another business?”
Anne Cherry Barnett
Partner
Reed Smith LLP
Email: abarnett@reedsmith.com
Anne is a Labor and Employment partner in the firm's San Francisco office.
Michele Haydel Gehrke
Partner
Reed Smith LLP
Email: mgehrke@reedsmith.com
Michele is a Labor and Employment partner in the firm's San Francisco office.
Carla M. Wirtschafter
Associate
Reed Smith LLP
Phone: (310) 734-5200
Email: CWirtschafter@ReedSmith.com
California courts have broadly enforced the state of California's long-standing public policy against non-competition and non-solicitation restrictive covenants in the employment context, as codified in California Business and Professions Code Section 16600. As the California Supreme Court made clear in its 2008 decision in Edwards v. Arthur Andersen, LLP, S...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In