Epstein Becker: California Court of Appeal Enforces Stipulated Injunction That Restricts Competition | Practical Law

Epstein Becker: California Court of Appeal Enforces Stipulated Injunction That Restricts Competition | Practical Law

This Law Firm Publication by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. discusses a California Court of Appeal's recent decision in Wanke, Industrial, Commercial, Residential, Inc. v. Superior Court, upholding a stipulated injunction that prohibited employees from soliciting specific customers from their former employer. Wanke sued two former employees and their new company for misappropriation of trade secrets. As part of a settlement agreement, the parties entered into a stipulated injunction that prohibited the former employees from soliciting specific customers identified in a customer list. In response to Wanke's later motion to find the employees in contempt for having contacted a customer on that list, the district court held the stipulated injunction was invalid under California law as an unlawful restraint of trade. The Court of Appeal reversed, holding the stipulated injunction was enforceable as the district court properly had jurisdiction and the injunction was facially valid.

Epstein Becker: California Court of Appeal Enforces Stipulated Injunction That Restricts Competition

by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C.
Published on 10 Oct 2012California, United States
This Law Firm Publication by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. discusses a California Court of Appeal's recent decision in Wanke, Industrial, Commercial, Residential, Inc. v. Superior Court, upholding a stipulated injunction that prohibited employees from soliciting specific customers from their former employer. Wanke sued two former employees and their new company for misappropriation of trade secrets. As part of a settlement agreement, the parties entered into a stipulated injunction that prohibited the former employees from soliciting specific customers identified in a customer list. In response to Wanke's later motion to find the employees in contempt for having contacted a customer on that list, the district court held the stipulated injunction was invalid under California law as an unlawful restraint of trade. The Court of Appeal reversed, holding the stipulated injunction was enforceable as the district court properly had jurisdiction and the injunction was facially valid.