Skip to content
  • Home
  • About
  • Ask Work Watch
  • Dorsey’s L&E Practice
  • Disclaimers
Dorsey & Whitney LLP
  • Home
  • About
  • Ask Work Watch
  • Dorsey’s L&E Practice
  • Disclaimers
Quirky Question # 159, Non-Competes and Choice of Law Provisions

Quirky Question # 159, Non-Competes and Choice of Law Provisions

October 27, 2010 

by Dorsey & Whitney

Question: Our company’s headquarters is located in Seattle, Washington.  We want to hire someone to start up our company’s new location in another state.  Because of the competitiveness of our industry, we would like our new employee to sign a non-compete...

POSTED IN Litigation Issues, Post-Employment Restrictive Covenants
Non-Competes, Unsigned Agreement; Quirky Question # 126

Non-Competes, Unsigned Agreement; Quirky Question # 126

December 27, 2009 

by Dorsey & Whitney

Quirky Question # 126: We have a non-compete issue.  Several years ago, we provided our employees with an employment agreement that contained various post-employment restrictive covenants.  When one of our employees left a couple of years later and started competing...

VIEW ALL POSTS ABOUT: Post-Employment Restrictive Covenants
Employment Law in China

Employment Law in China

October 6, 2009 

by Dorsey & Whitney

Best Practices to Ensure that a Non-Competition Agreement is Enforceable in China By Richard Chao and Haidong Yang Introduction After more than a year since the implementation of the PRC Employment Contract Law (the “Law”) (the PRC Employment Contract Law...

VIEW ALL POSTS ABOUT: International Employment Law, Post-Employment Restrictive Covenants
Quirky Question # 104, Restrictive Covenants in Acquisition Context

Quirky Question # 104, Restrictive Covenants in Acquisition Context

July 20, 2009 

by Dorsey & Whitney

Quirky Question # 104:  We are a high tech company.  We use various post-employment restrictive covenants with many, though not all, of our employees.  For our engineers, our senior managers and other select employees, however, we require non-competition, non-solicitation and...

VIEW ALL POSTS ABOUT: Post-Employment Restrictive Covenants
Restrictive Covenants Tied to Compensation, Quirky Question # 96

Restrictive Covenants Tied to Compensation, Quirky Question # 96

June 2, 2009 

by Dorsey & Whitney

Quirky Question # 96: Our company is considering requiring our existing and future employees to sign non-competition agreements.  To make the agreements more palatable to our employees, we are considering linking the obligations imposed on the employees to an obligation...

VIEW ALL POSTS ABOUT: Post-Employment Restrictive Covenants
Stealing Confidential Information, Quirky Question # 78

Stealing Confidential Information, Quirky Question # 78

January 26, 2009 

by Dorsey & Whitney

Quirky Question # 78: I am the HR Director at our company.  I just learned that one of our most valuable employees has resigned and taken a position with a competitor.  I requested our IT Department to make an evaluation...

VIEW ALL POSTS ABOUT: Misappropriation of Trade Secrets, Post-Employment Restrictive Covenants
California Non-Competes, Quirky Question # 55

California Non-Competes, Quirky Question # 55

September 3, 2008 

by Dorsey & Whitney

Quirky Question # 55: We have a highly mobile workforce, and we are concerned about our former employees going to work for a competitor, stealing our customers, and raiding our employees.  We are a technology based company and have developed...

VIEW ALL POSTS ABOUT: California Questions, Post-Employment Restrictive Covenants
Usurpation of Corporate Opportunity, Quirky Question # 52

Usurpation of Corporate Opportunity, Quirky Question # 52

August 11, 2008 

by Dorsey & Whitney

Quirky Question # 52: I formerly was employed as an engineer of a high tech start-up company.  I worked for the company for several years in a non-management role.  The company struggled to complete its product (or even to get...

VIEW ALL POSTS ABOUT: Common Law Claims, Post-Employment Restrictive Covenants
Restrictive Covenants; Interference with Contract:  Quirky Question # 11

Restrictive Covenants; Interference with Contract: Quirky Question # 11

December 4, 2007 

by Dorsey & Whitney

Quirky Question # 11: Our firm uses non-competition agreements for a number of our key employees.  The non-competition agreement was drafted by our outside counsel who tells us that it is enforceable.  One of our managers who had signed such...

VIEW ALL POSTS ABOUT: Post-Employment Restrictive Covenants
  • « Previous Page

Follow:

About

Published by attorneys in Dorsey’s Labor & Employment practice group, Dorsey Work Watch explores the legal and cultural forces shaping today’s workplace and provides a balanced perspective on federal trends and the nuances created by evolving state and local laws and regulatory changes.

Dorsey Work Watch offers insights to help executives, managers, in-house counsel, and HR professionals in managing challenges in the dynamic workplace, making informed decisions while managing risks.

Subscribe to Blog Via Email

Editors

avatar for Jack SullivanJack Sullivan

Jack is a Partner in Dorsey’s Labor & Employment group, where he focuses his practice on employment adv...

avatar for Nisha VermaNisha Verma

Nisha has delivered results for her clients with respect to all aspects of employment litigation, including com...

Authors

avatar for Aaron GoldsteinAaron Goldstein

Aaron is a Partner in Dorsey’s Labor & Employ...

avatar for Hannah GreenHannah Green

Hannah is an associate in the Costa Mesa offic...

avatar for Michelle HaynesMichelle Haynes

Michelle’s practical and thorough approach to l...

avatar for Susan LorencSusan Lorenc

Susan is a strategic labor and employment advisor...

avatar for Nicholas J. PappasNicholas J. Pappas

Nick litigates and counsels with respect to com...

avatar for Ketul PatelKetul Patel

Ketul advises employers on the full spectru...

Search

Popular Topics

  • Wage and Hour Issues
  • Class and Collective Actions
  • Litigation Issues
  • At Will Employment
  • Wage and Hour Issues
  • Employee Handbook / Policies

Other Topics

Disclaimer

By accessing the Dorsey Work Watch blog, you are requesting information. The information you are requesting is not legal advice, advertising or solicitation. Transmission and receipt of the materials on the blog do not constitute legal advice, establish an attorney-client relationship, or create any duty of Dorsey to any reader. An attorney-client relationship with Dorsey may be established only by an engagement letter signed by a Dorsey lawyer. Information sent to Dorsey by persons who are not clients of the firm is not subject to any duty of confidentiality on the part of the firm.

The information on the blog may be changed without notice and is not guaranteed to be complete, correct or up-to-date, and may not reflect the most current legal developments. The opinions expressed on the blog are the opinions of the authors only and not those of Dorsey.

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING
Some of the content on this blog is considered Attorney Advertising under the applicable rules of certain states. Results depend on a number of factors unique to each matter. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

PRIVACY POLICY STATEMENT
The privacy policy statement is set out at Data Privacy | Dorsey.

The information on the blog may be changed without notice and is not guaranteed to be complete, correct or up-to-date, and may not reflect the most current legal developments. The opinions expressed on the blog are the opinions of the authors only and not those of Dorsey.

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING
Some of the content on this blog is considered Attorney Advertising under the applicable rules of certain states. Results depend on a number of factors unique to each matter. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

PRIVACY POLICY STATEMENT
The privacy policy statement is set out at Data Privacy | Dorsey.

Latest Posts

  • Influencers at Work: Novel Issues in Employee Speech
  • California Deepens Its AI Employment Oversight: New Workforce Tracking Tool Signals the Next Phase of Regulation
  • Why U.S. Companies Cannot Ignore Forced Labor in Supply Chains
  • Nisha Verma on the Fallout of the Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni Dispute
  • Navigating the WARN Act: Strategic Workforce Planning in Hotel Transactions
  • PAGA State of Play – Reform, Regulation, and Lasting Leverage
  • Illinois Employment Law Updates for 2026: What Employers Need to Know
  • Amendments to New York City’s Earned Safe and Sick Leave Law
  • One Year In: What We Know About The EEOC’s Approach to Employer DEI Programs
  • Ryan Gehbauer Joined Dorsey & Whitney in Dallas as Partner in Labor & Employment Group

Address

Dorsey & Whitney

Minneapolis
50 South Sixth Street
Suite 1500
Minneapolis, MN 55402-1498

T: (612) 340-2600
F: (612) 340-2868

Labor & Employment News, Events, & Publications



Labor & Employment News, Events, & Publications
  • Disclaimers
  • Terms of Service

Dorsey Work Watch © 2026 Dorsey & Whitney LLC All Rights Reserved