Tag Archives: Minnesota

Minnesota Court Of Appeals Reaffirms That A Non-Compete Must Be Part Of A Job Offer To A Prospective Employee

Last month, this Blog highlighted a Minnesota decision evaluating the consideration required for non-compete agreements entered into after the commencement of employment.  As that decision held, such agreements must be supported by valuable consideration over and above continued employment. This month, in Safety Center, Inc. v. Stier, Case No. A17-0360 (Minn. App., Nov. 6, 2017), the … Continue Reading

Continued Employment Isn’t Always Sufficient – Minnesota Requires Additional Consideration For Non-Compete With Current Employee

The Minnesota federal district court recently refused to enforce a non-compete agreement, in part, because the employer failed to establish that the agreement was supported by valuable consideration.  The decision, issued on October 6, 2017 in Mid-America Business Systems, v. Sanderson et. al., Case No. 17-3876, serves as an important reminder that, in Minnesota, there … Continue Reading

Minnesota Supreme Court Allows Advice of Counsel Defense to Tortious Interference Claim in Non-Compete Dispute

The Minnesota Supreme Court has affirmed lower court findings dismissing a claim of tortious interference with contract by a staff augmentation company that successfully sued a former employee and his new employer for breach of a non-compete agreement. Sysdyne Corp. v. Rousslang, et al, No. A13-0898 (Minn. March 4, 2015).  Sysdyne, the plaintiff at the trial court … Continue Reading

Half-Billion Dollar Arbitration Award in Trade Secrets Case Affirmed by Minnesota Supreme Court in Trade Secrets Dispute

The Minnesota Supreme Court has affirmed an arbitrator’s eye-popping award of $525 million plus prejudgment interest totaling $96 million and post-award interest in a trade secrets dust up between Seagate Technology, LLC and Western Digital Corporation, et al. Seagate Technology, LLC v. Western Digital Corporation, et al and Sining Mao, No. A12-1994 (Minn. October 8, … Continue Reading

Should a Non-Compete be Signed Before or After Employment Begins? Answer: It Depends

The variation among states when it comes to non-compete law is a source of frustration for many employers.  And sometimes, similar facts can lead to opposite results depending on the jurisdiction.  A recent decision from the Southern District of Alabama, holding that a non-compete can only be signed after employment begins, shows how Alabama law … Continue Reading

Federal Court in Minnesota Rejects Automatic Tolling of Non-Compete

We have previously written about tolling provisions on this blog.  In a decision from the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, Judge Patrick J. Schiltz held that, under Minnesota law, non-compete terms do not automatically reset upon violation. The decision in U.S. Water v. Watertech of America, No. 13-CV-1258 (PJS/JSM), concerned a motion for a preliminary … Continue Reading
LexBlog