Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Employment Law StrategistKickerFeaturesTopicsCommercial LawLitigationSectionsNewsLJN Newsletters

Non-Authority for Non-Recruitment Covenants Under New York Law

By Richard C. Schoenstein

As hiring resumes in the financial services industry and elsewhere, potential employers undoubtedly will renew consideration of the recruitment of employees from competitors. While many employers have written employment contracts with restrictive covenants designed to hinder employees from departing for a competitor, the state and federal courts considering New York law have not uniformly enforced such provisions. Thus, many employers have attempted to utilize more specific contractual limitations on the conduct of former employees, including covenants variously referred to as “non-solicitation,” “non-recruitment,” “non-hire” or “anti-raiding” provisions, which are designed to prevent employees who leave from immediately turning around and poaching their now-former fellow employees to leave with them.

Significantly, the enforceability of a covenant not to solicit or recruit employees of one's former employer has never been addressed by the New York's highest court, the Court of Appeals. Variations of such provisions have been considered, and sometimes enforced through preliminary injunctions, by trial level New York state and federal courts. But these decisions turn on specific facts and typically fail to address the broad questions with intellectual rigor. Thus, the prevailing notion that non-recruitment provisions are somehow “easier” to enforce than broader non-compete covenants is not supported by case precedent. Instead, the analysis that has been applied to non-recruitment provisions simply mirrors the approach that has been used in typical non-compete cases for years.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

Beach Boys Songs Written Decades Ago Triggered Current Quarrel With Lawyers Image

There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Transfer Tax Implications on Real Property Leases Image

The real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.