by Christopher Hagenow | Apr 24, 2017 | Blog, Uncategorized
Perhaps We Are Returning to a More Normalized Economy? Here is an interesting read from The Indiana Lawyer regarding the decline in bankruptcy. Name(required) Email(required) Website Comment(required)...
by Christopher Hagenow | Sep 22, 2014 | Business Law, Contracts, Employment Law, Uncategorized
In a recent case decided by the Indiana Court of Appeals, the judges unanimously agreed that a 10 day break in employment with a prior employer started the running of the non-compete agreement between that employer and its employee, despite the fact that same employee was rehired by that same employer 10 days later. At the time of the employee’s original hire, he was asked to sign a non-compete agreement, which he did. He was subsequently fired. Ten days later his employer offered to revoke the termination and allow him to return to his prior position. The employee returned to his position but the employer did not ask the employee to sign a new non-compete agreement. Approximately 2 ½ years later, the employee left that employment and immediately began working for his former’s employer’s competitor. The employer filed a lawsuit seeking to enforce the non-compete agreement that the employee signed at the time of his original hire. The employer argued that because the termination was “revoked”, and the employee rehired, the non-compete agreement signed when the employee was originally hired should still remain in full force and effect. The Indiana Court of Appeals rejected the employer’s argument and ruled in favor of the employee. The Court noted certain principles related to non-compete provisions, which we have previously discussed here. Included among these are the fact that covenants not to compete are in restraint of trade and are not favored by the law; they are strictly construed against employers and are enforced only if reasonable; and those covenants must be reasonable with respect to legitimate protectable interest of the employer....
by Christopher Hagenow | Sep 15, 2014 | Blog, Business Law, Contracts, Employment Law, Uncategorized
Lawyers rely upon previous court decisions when determining what advice to give to clients. By reading previous decisions based upon facts similar to a particular situation, a lawyer can best advise the client what is likely to happen and how to approach the problem. For this reason, lawyers rely on the law generally being the same year after year. The law can and does change, however. In fact, sometimes a court will actually reverse one of its prior rulings. The 7th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals recently did just that, and noted it is “not attractive” to “move from one side of a conflict to another,” but because the Court has a duty to apply the relevant law in a way to avoid “unnecessary litigation,” then the Court must do so. Furthermore, as we all know the world changes, and sometimes changes very quickly. It is amazing to think that the iPhone was not introduced until October 2007. Think about how much the world has changed as a result of the introduction into our lives of the iPhone/ Smartphone. Looking back a few years further, the Internet used to be a novelty, and yet now is a practical necessity to everyday life, school and business. However the process for changing the law is often quite slow, and so situations arise where technology and the world change so fast that the law is unable to keep pace and so there is no legal precedent to deal with new situations. As a result matters must be resolved using laws that were not really designed to deal with issues in the modern...
