College Discussion - View Single Post

mrego · 04-20-2008, 11:44 PM

Of course, this is all off the OP's target...
NDAs (Non-disclosure agreements) are more common. As stated above, what an employer really doesn't want is its intellectual property, etc. being taken by an ex-employee.
I think a simple trip to a lawyer to discuss the agreement (the fee would probably be $100) to see if there was even a problem would have been better that sitting on a couch for two years.
Bottom line: slavery is illegal in all 50 states. If no consideration (compensation) is being provided, there is no contract to provide a service or non-service to a non-employer.
"Most jurisdictions in which such contracts have been examined by the courts have deemed them to be legally binding, so long as the clause contains reasonable limitations as to the geographical area and time period in which an employee of a company may not compete. Courts have held that, as a matter of public policy, an individual can not be barred from carrying out a trade in which he has been trained except to the extent that is necessary to protect the employer."

So I doubt he was banned from working anywhere in the world for 2 years.

"Few States totally ban or prohibit non-competes to the extent, for example, that California does."
"In Virginia, the enforceability of covenants not to compete is governed by common law principles. As restrictions on trade, CNCs are not favored by Virginia courts, which will only enforce narrowly drafted CNCs that do not offend public policy." "In Virginia, a plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the covenant is reasonable in the sense that it is: (1) no greater than necessary to protect its legitimate business interests, such as a trade secret; (2) not unduly harsh or oppressive in restricting the employee’s ability to earn a living; and (3) not against public policy. Paramount Termite Control Co., Inc v. Rector, 380 S.E.2d 922, 924 (Va. 1989)." etc.
"Courts will rewrite overly broad non-competition agreements by redrawing geographic, time or other restrictions on an employee's non-competition agreement."

Quotes are from Wikipedia which has additional detail, citations, and examples from other states like Ohio.
Sorry, I could not find Marx, et al.
Anyway, I'm not very interested in someone's supposed problem (brought on by himself). I'm just extremely skeptical.

04-20-2008, 11:44 PM	#13
mrego Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Gender: Male Threads: 17 Posts: 203	Of course, this is all off the OP's target... NDAs (Non-disclosure agreements) are more common. As stated above, what an employer really doesn't want is its intellectual property, etc. being taken by an ex-employee. I think a simple trip to a lawyer to discuss the agreement (the fee would probably be $100) to see if there was even a problem would have been better that sitting on a couch for two years. Bottom line: slavery is illegal in all 50 states. If no consideration (compensation) is being provided, there is no contract to provide a service or non-service to a non-employer. "Most jurisdictions in which such contracts have been examined by the courts have deemed them to be legally binding, so long as the clause contains reasonable limitations as to the geographical area and time period in which an employee of a company may not compete. Courts have held that, as a matter of public policy, an individual can not be barred from carrying out a trade in which he has been trained except to the extent that is necessary to protect the employer." So I doubt he was banned from working anywhere in the world for 2 years. "Few States totally ban or prohibit non-competes to the extent, for example, that California does." "In Virginia, the enforceability of covenants not to compete is governed by common law principles. As restrictions on trade, CNCs are not favored by Virginia courts, which will only enforce narrowly drafted CNCs that do not offend public policy." "In Virginia, a plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the covenant is reasonable in the sense that it is: (1) no greater than necessary to protect its legitimate business interests, such as a trade secret; (2) not unduly harsh or oppressive in restricting the employee’s ability to earn a living; and (3) not against public policy. Paramount Termite Control Co., Inc v. Rector, 380 S.E.2d 922, 924 (Va. 1989)." etc. "Courts will rewrite overly broad non-competition agreements by redrawing geographic, time or other restrictions on an employee's non-competition agreement." Quotes are from Wikipedia which has additional detail, citations, and examples from other states like Ohio. Sorry, I could not find Marx, et al. Anyway, I'm not very interested in someone's supposed problem (brought on by himself). I'm just extremely skeptical.