California Court of Appeal

In plaintiffs' suit against the defendant to enjoin it from enforcing noncompete and nonsolicitation clauses in employment agreements used in California, trial court's ruling that the clauses were facially void under Business and Professions Code section 16600 and that their use violated California's Unfair Competition Law and that defendant's unclean hands defense and its cross-complaint for unfair competition failed as a matter of law is affirmed where: 1) the trial court properly determined that the clauses were void as a matter of law, that no defense applied and that the cross-complaint failed to state a cause of action; and 2) trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a permanent injunction and costs

Appellate Information

• Decided 11/19/2009
• Published 11/19/2009

Judges

• DOI TODD, Acting P.J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Feldman Gale,James A. Gale and Todd M. Malynn, Los Angeles, for Plaintiffs, Cross-defendants, Respondents and Appellants., Steptoe & Johnson, Mark A. Neubauer, Rebecca Edelson and Carla A. Veltman, Los Angeles, for Defendant, Cross-complainant, Respondent and Appellant.