United States Seventh Circuit

In a suit alleging that defendant violated non-competition, non-solicitation, and non-disclosure provisions of his employment agreement when he left to work for a competitor, judgment for defendant and award of costs and fees is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to modify the overbroad non-compete agreement; 2) plaintiff did not present enough evidence of solicitations of plaintiff's customers by defendant to allow a reasonable juror to find a breach of the non-compete provision; 3) defendant did not solicit plaintiff's employees; 4) plaintiff did not demonstrate how information disclosed to its competitor would provide a competitive advantage within the meaning of the non-disclosure provision; 5) the contractual language supported the district court's award of costs and fees, despite the fact that the expenses were paid for by defendant's employer; and 6) the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining the actual amount of the award of fees and costs.

Appellate Information

• Argued 02/05/2007
• Decided 02/20/2008
• Published 02/20/2008

Judges

• SYKES, Circuit Judge., Before EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge, and ROVNER and SYKES, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Seventh Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Richard J. Nogal, Goldstine, Skrodzki, Russian, Nemec & Hoff, Burr Ridge, IL, for Plaintiff-Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Lawrence C. DiNardo, Jones Day, Chicago, IL, for Defendant-Appellee.