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.
Articles About Georgia Labor And Employment Law.
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.
3 Ga. Bills That Died In The Latest Legislative Session
Atlanta Partner, Rick Warren, was featured in the Law360 Pulse article, “3 Ga. Bills That Died In The Legislative Session.”
In the article, Rick discusses why Georgia legislators rejected state bill H.B. 1389 or the “Georgia Safe Workplaces Act,” in the last legislative session.
Non-Compete News: Georgia Appeals Court Clarifies What Constitutes Appropriate Definition of Territory In Non-Compete Under RCA
Last month, in American Plumbing Professionals, Inc. v. ServeStar, LLC, Georgia’s Court of Appeals reversed a trial court’s determination that a non-compete provision was unenforceable and void because its territory was too broad. The non-compete at issue defined the geographic restriction as “the territory where Employee provided services on behalf of [the employer] during the last twelve months of his or her employment,” which extended “throughout those parts of the United States of America where [the employer] transacts business.”
Non-Compete News: Federal Court in Georgia Finds Customer Contact Information May Be a Trade Secret, Interprets Customer and Employee Non-Solicit Provisions under Georgia’s Restrictive Covenants Act
In Tanium v. Yago et al., the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia recently reminded us of a few things: (1) customer contact information can constitute a trade secret; (2) the Georgia Restrictive Covenant Act (“RCA”) provides a court greater freedom to modify an otherwise overbroad restriction; (3) a non-solicit of employees provision may be liberally enforced; and (4) bad acts performed by an employee prior to his departure from a company influence how a court rules.
GA District Court’s Federal Contractor Vaccine Mandate Injunction Upheld by Eleventh Circuit – Should Federal Contractors Now Worry About ETS?
On December 7, 2021, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia issued a preliminary nationwide injunction enjoining the enforcement of Executive Order 14042’s federal contractor vaccine mandate. The government promptly appealed the order to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, and also moved to stay the injunction.
Georgia Courts Cannot Toll Duration of Noncompete Agreement, Even Against Willful Violator
Since the passage of the Georgia Restrictive Covenants Act (O.C.G.A. § 13-8-50 et seq.) in May 2011, there has been some level of uncertainty regarding the extent to which a court may “blue pencil” or modify an otherwise unenforceable covenant, including whether a court may extend the restrictions period of
Non-Compete News: Georgia Courts Cannot Extend Non-Compete Beyond Its Terms
The more things change, the more they stay the same. That adage is apparent in Georgia’s non-compete law, which had a major overhaul in May 2011, when Georgia’s Restrictive Covenant Act (RCA) became effective. The RCA applies to restrictive covenant agreements entered into after May 2011, whereas Georgia’s well-developed common law applies to agreements entered into prior to that date. Nevertheless, prior common law themes play out time and again in Georgia courts’ interpretation of the RCA. One such theme is that a court is not allowed to extend a non-compete provision beyond the terms drafted in the agreement.
Georgia 2021: Unemployment Benefit Developments
Georgia employers may be experiencing some whiplash from the latest updates to the state’s unemployment and partial unemployment rules and regulations in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Atlanta Mayor Issues Indoor Mask Mandate Due to CDC Guidance and Increase in COVID-19 Cases
On July 28, 2021, Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms issued an indoor mask mandate via executive order that requires “all persons in an entity or a public place [to] wear a facial covering or mask over the mouth and nose at all times when indoors.”
Non-Compete News: Restrictive Covenant Act Case Decided by Georgia State-Wide Business Court
In May 2011, Georgia’s Restrictive Covenant Act (OCGA 13-8-50 et seq.) (“RCA”) became effective and applied to all agreements executed on or after May 11, 2011.
New Georgia Decision Clarifies Scope of Computer Trespass Statute
Just as the United States Supreme Court recently limited the reach of the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”) in Van Buren v. United States, the Georgia Supreme Court has now reined in the Georgia state law counterpart to the CFAA.
Georgia Prohibits COVID-19 ‘Vaccine Passports’ for Public Employers, Also Limiting Private Employers
While many states have issued orders prohibiting inquiries about an individual’s COVID-19 vaccination status, Georgia has become the first to restrict public employers from requiring proof of a COVID-19 vaccination as a condition of employment.
Georgia Prohibits State-Implemented COVID-19 Vaccine Passport Programs and Restricts Disclosure of Individuals’ Vaccination Status
On May 25, 2021, Governor Brian Kemp signed an Executive Order (Order) prohibiting any state agency, provider of state services, or state property from implementing a Vaccine Passport Program (VPP)1 or otherwise requiring an individual to provide proof of COVID-19 vaccination. The Order further states that no data from the
Ambiguous Offer of Judgment Cannot Support Attorney’s Fees Award, Georgia Court of Appeals Holds
An unaccepted offer of judgment that contains internal inconsistencies and ambiguities as to its scope is neither enforceable nor supports an award of attorney’s fees under Georgia’s Rule 68. Reversing a trial court’s $837,445 award of attorney’s fees to defendants, the Georgia Court of Appeals held the defendants’ offer of
Social Profiles