In June 2023, the Georgia Court of Appeals held in North American Senior Benefits, LLC v. Wimmer that an employee non-solicitation covenant must contain an express geographic limitation to be enforceable.
Articles About Georgia Labor And Employment Law.
Georgia Health Law Update: CON Reform
Weed at Work: Can Georgia Employers Still Drug Test?
Across the United States, a broad legal spectrum has developed regarding the use of marijuana, thus creating great uncertainty among employers that have long striven to maintain drug-free workplaces. Federally, marijuana still is classified as a prohibited Schedule I substance under the Controlled Substance Act. In recent years, many states
Noncompete News: The Eleventh Circuit Addresses Georgia Noncompete Statute in “Sale of Business” Context
Prior to the enactment of the Georgia Restrictive Covenant Act (“RCA”), Georgia courts interpreted noncompete provisions entered into in the context of selling a business differently than they did between employers and employees. Indeed, under prior law, courts were allowed to “modify”—strike out and narrow, but not supply entirely missing terms—an otherwise overbroad noncompete in the “sale of business” context, but could not modify one in the employer-employee context.
Georgia Courts May Not Apply Foreign Law to Restrictive Covenants That Do Not Comply with the Georgia Restrictive Covenants Act
On September 6, 2023, the Georgia Supreme Court reaffirmed that Georgia courts must first determine whether a restrictive covenant is enforceable under Georgia law before applying a foreign choice-of-law provision.
Noncompete News: The More Things Change, the More They Remain the Same: Georgia Supreme Court Addresses Choice of Law Provisions in Noncompete Context
Historically, Georgia courts have declined to apply another state’s law to determine whether to enforce restrictive covenants against a Georgia employee, regardless of whether the agreement stated that another state’s law controlled (choice-of-law provision). So, too, Georgia’s law has long distinguished between restrictive covenants that are reasonable (in scope, duration, and geographic reach) and those that are unreasonable; the former are enforceable, while the latter are considered “in general restraint of trade.” Contracts that are “in general restraint of trade” are “deemed to be contrary to public policy” and “cannot be enforced” in Georgia. O.C.G.A. 13-8-2(a).
Georgia Appellate Court Says Employee Nonsolicitation Covenant Not Enforceable Without Express Geographic Limitation
In a recent decision, a Georgia appellate panel held that an employee nonsolicitation covenant that limits what parties can do following the end of a business relationship must have an explicit geographic limitation to be enforceable under state law.
Georgia Court of Appeals Invalidates Employee Non-Solicitation Provisions Without Geographic Limits
Amid the recent backlash to restrictive covenants across the country, a Georgia Court of Appeals has held that employee non-solicitation provisions must include a geographic limit to be enforceable. North American Senior Benefits v. Wimmer, No. A23A0162 (June 13, 2023).
Georgia Court of Appeals: Non-Solicitation-of-Employees Covenant Must Contain Express Geographic Limitation
The Georgia Court of Appeals recently provided important clarification of the requirements for non-recruitment covenants under Georgia’s 2011 Restrictive Covenants Act. In North American Senior Benefits, LLC v. Wimmer, 2023 WL 3963931 (Ga Ct. App. June 12, 2023), the court held that an employee non-solicitation provision must contain an
Voting and Sick Leave for Georgia Employees
A new Georgia law takes effect on July 1, 2023 (GA S 129), that provides employees time off to advance vote in primaries and elections. This new measure amends existing law and, among other things, provides time off for employees to advance vote and revises provisions related to time off
Cap on Punitive Damages is Constitutional, Georgia Supreme Court Holds
A $250,000 cap in punitive damages is constitutional, the Georgia Supreme Court has confirmed, upholding the trial court’s decision to substantially reduce a $50 million verdict to $250,000. Taylor v. Devereux Found., Inc., Nos. S22A1060, S22X1061, 2023 Ga. LEXIS 63 (Mar. 15, 2023).
NONCOMPETE NEWS ALERT: APPLYING THE “JANITOR RULE,” A GEORGIA COURT STRIKES DOWN “IN ANY CAPACITY” NON-COMPETE
Prior to the enactment of Georgia’s Restrictive Covenant Act (“RCA”) in May 2011, Georgia courts uniformly held void and unenforceable “in any capacity” non-compete provisions in the employer-employee context. “In any capacity” non-competes are those provisions that prohibit an employee from working for a competitor in any capacity and not limited to the types of duties that the employee performed for his current employer. And under Georgia’s prior common law, a court was not allowed to revise an otherwise void and unenforceable provision to render it enforceable.
Atlanta Amends Anti-Discrimination Ordinance to Include Protections for Gender Expression and Criminal Histories
The City Council of Atlanta, Georgia recently passed an ordinance that amends its existing anti-discrimination law to include protection on the basis of “criminal history status” as well as “gender expression.” The ordinance is effective immediately.
With regard to gender expression, the law simply amends existing law to include
Non-Compete News: Georgia Court Holds Non-compete and Non-solicit of Employee Provisions With Missing Territory Unenforceable and Void
Earlier this year, in Steuer v. Tomaras, et al., Georgia’s Statewide Business Court again refused to modify certain restrictive covenants that were missing a territory. Dr. Steuer, a former partner of the defendant doctors, sought to enforce restrictive covenants. The doctor defendants sought to declare the non-compete and non-solicit provisions contained in the agreements unenforceable.
New Georgia Employment Laws Change Definition of Employment, Restrict Local Laws Regulating Work Hours
Georgia Governor Brian Kemp has signed into law two measures addressing the employment relationship. The first, Act 809 (H.B. 389), alters the definition of employment for purposes of unemployment benefits.