
O-Trap
Posts: 14,994
Jun 24, 2010 7:09pm
I had/have a non-compete agreement with my former employer, who was the owner of the company. A couple months ago, he and his partners sold the company.
My question is this: To what extent does the non-compete continue to be in effect in such a situation? The company was used as the party in the agreement. As the company has now been sold and the name changed. Does the agreement still continue on with the former owner (aka the "person" whose company initially enacted the agreement)? The new owner (the person who owns the intellectual property of the company now)? Is it no longer applicable (since the name of the company in the agreement is no longer a name of any company)?
Any of you business law gurus (ptown?) know what all applies here?
By the way, I know that many non-competes are not all that enforceable. However, I had it looked over by a lawyer friend of mine who said that the only way out of it HE sees would be to go through the legal process of appealing exception based on being able to find no sustainable work elsewhere. That isn't the case, and in the past, they HAVE appealed to the agreement by sending a CnD to my home because of my doing a short-term contracted job for someone in the same industry, so I know they have shown that they care.
Thanks for your help, in advance.
My question is this: To what extent does the non-compete continue to be in effect in such a situation? The company was used as the party in the agreement. As the company has now been sold and the name changed. Does the agreement still continue on with the former owner (aka the "person" whose company initially enacted the agreement)? The new owner (the person who owns the intellectual property of the company now)? Is it no longer applicable (since the name of the company in the agreement is no longer a name of any company)?
Any of you business law gurus (ptown?) know what all applies here?
By the way, I know that many non-competes are not all that enforceable. However, I had it looked over by a lawyer friend of mine who said that the only way out of it HE sees would be to go through the legal process of appealing exception based on being able to find no sustainable work elsewhere. That isn't the case, and in the past, they HAVE appealed to the agreement by sending a CnD to my home because of my doing a short-term contracted job for someone in the same industry, so I know they have shown that they care.
Thanks for your help, in advance.
M
MontyBrunswick
Jun 24, 2010 7:17pm
Unless you specifically outlined a "transfer" clause in the initial agreement, that contract is now void.

Fab4Runner
Posts: 6,196
Jun 24, 2010 8:20pm
Your ex boss is hot.

Heretic
Posts: 18,820
Jun 24, 2010 11:57pm
I know a few years back, management in my company instituted a NC clause and we all had to sign a paper. At least one person ignored it after leaving and no action was even taken.
So, I'd say to use the combination of your intuition about the ownership (and if they are/aren't oblivious to you signing it, as you seemed to insinuate over time that you were cool with the former boss, who apparently is hot, as well) and your desire to take whatever job would compete with the old place. Hell, if you are cool with ex-boss (as in, kept in any contact with him since being released), informally question him about the situation.
So, I'd say to use the combination of your intuition about the ownership (and if they are/aren't oblivious to you signing it, as you seemed to insinuate over time that you were cool with the former boss, who apparently is hot, as well) and your desire to take whatever job would compete with the old place. Hell, if you are cool with ex-boss (as in, kept in any contact with him since being released), informally question him about the situation.

O-Trap
Posts: 14,994
Jun 25, 2010 2:14am
Thanks, Fabbie, for the contribution. LOL
Thanks to dlazz and Heretic as well. I just reviewed. No transfer clause.
Thanks to dlazz and Heretic as well. I just reviewed. No transfer clause.

HitsRus
Posts: 9,206
Jun 25, 2010 9:19am
I'm not a lawyer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn once. It may hinge on whether the Company is incorporated or not. Corporations are their own entity, regardless of who owns the majority shares. Hence, if your agreement is with the corporation, it may still be valid. You really should not take anything for granted and consult a business attorney.
Q
queencitybuckeye
Posts: 7,117
Jun 25, 2010 9:24am
Just curious, how long is the term of the NC?

BigAppleBuckeye
Posts: 2,935
Jun 25, 2010 9:42am
O-Trap, I may be completely wrong here, but I always thought that non-competes only come into play for employees who willing leave the company (example: a Yahoo employee quitting to work for Google). Pretty sure if an employee's employment is terminated by circumstances outside of willing leave (like getting laid off, the company is sold, etc), the agreement is thrown out the window. I could be wrong though.
M
Manhattan Buckeye
Posts: 7,566
Jun 25, 2010 10:25am
^^^
You aren't completely wrong. Different jurisdictions have different views, but nearly all of them require some sort of consideration for a non-compete to be enforceable. Most non-competes that I've reviewed and drafted do NOT have an assignment clause unless the subject is a major part of the business and has received a lot of consideration in exchange for agreeing not to compete (e.g., a deal I did a year ago involved 3 principals of a business that just accepted private equity funding in a recap, and part of the deal was a 5 year non-compete for each of them - but they each got at least $10M out of the deal plus an employment agreement with a generous salary - in that case assignment is appropriate and expected), but that doesn't mean O-Trap's non-compete doesn't.
And O-Trap is correct about enforceability in general. No attorney would issue a legal opinion, and take on liability, that opines on the enforceability on a non-compete. The best any can do is look at caselaw and tell a client how judges have ruled in the past and what might happen in case enforceability is sought.
You aren't completely wrong. Different jurisdictions have different views, but nearly all of them require some sort of consideration for a non-compete to be enforceable. Most non-competes that I've reviewed and drafted do NOT have an assignment clause unless the subject is a major part of the business and has received a lot of consideration in exchange for agreeing not to compete (e.g., a deal I did a year ago involved 3 principals of a business that just accepted private equity funding in a recap, and part of the deal was a 5 year non-compete for each of them - but they each got at least $10M out of the deal plus an employment agreement with a generous salary - in that case assignment is appropriate and expected), but that doesn't mean O-Trap's non-compete doesn't.
And O-Trap is correct about enforceability in general. No attorney would issue a legal opinion, and take on liability, that opines on the enforceability on a non-compete. The best any can do is look at caselaw and tell a client how judges have ruled in the past and what might happen in case enforceability is sought.