Blogs

Posts Categorized: Labor and Employment Law

Posted: January 17, 2018

Plaintiff Was At Will Employee Because His Written Employment Agreement Did Not Have a Definite Term of Service

On January 8, 2018, Justice Platkin of the Albany County Commercial Division issued a decision in Morizio v. Roeder, 2018 NY Slip Op. 50027(U), holding that the plaintiff was an at will employee despite his written employment agreement because the agreement did not contain a definite term of employment, explaining: To be an effective and… Read more »

Posted: January 4, 2018

Judge Bianco Dismisses Case for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction after Finding That Public Union Was Not a “Mixed” Public/Private Union

District Judge Joseph F. Bianco recently dismissed a putative class action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (“LMRDA”). (Medford v. The Civil Serv. Empls. Ass., Local 1000, AFSCME, AFL-CIO, CSEA Local 881, 17-CV-0011 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 5, 2017) (JFB) (SIL). In doing so, Judge Bianco rejected… Read more »

Posted: October 28, 2017

Court Refuses to Issue Injunction Enforcing Restrictive Covenants

On September 28, 2017, Justice Emerson of the Suffolk County Commercial Division issued a decision in Devos, Ltd. v. United Returns, Inc., 2017 NY Slip Op. 51379(U), refusing to issue an injunction enforcing restrictive covenants in employment contracts, explaining: New York courts have long held that, since there are powerful considerations of public policy which… Read more »

Posted: June 21, 2017

Failure to Set Standards For Award of Stock Options Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith

On June 15, 2017, the First Department issued a decision in Zakrzewski v. Luxoft USA, Inc., 2017 NY Slip Op. 04906, holding that allegations that the defendant failed to set standards by which the plaintiff could earn stock options stated a claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, explaining:… Read more »

Posted: May 8, 2017

Short-Term, Worldwide Restrictive Covenant Enforced

On April 21, 2017, Justice Kornreich of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Eagle Energy Brokers, LLC v. Stanton, 2017 NY Slip Op. 30834(U), enforcing a short-term, worldwide restrictive covenant, explaining: Since Eagle only seeks recourse for revenue attributable to its clients for the subject three-month period, the court finds this… Read more »

Posted: February 4, 2017

Court Issues Injunction Enforcing Covenant Not to Compete

On January 12, 2017, Justice Ash of the Kings County Commercial Division issued a decision in Shimon v. Paper Enterprises, Inc., 2017 NY Slip Op. 30101(U), issuing an injunction enforcing a covenant not to compete, explaining: It is well established that covenants not to compete, which relate to the sale of a business and its… Read more »

Posted: December 15, 2016

Irreparable Injury Presumed From Breach of Non-Compete Made In Connection With Sale of Business

On November 29, 2016, the First Department issued a decision in BDC Management Services, LLC v. Singer, 2016 NY Slip Op. 08006, affirming the grant of a preliminary injunction enforcing “non-competition and non-solicitation covenants,” explaining: Defendants do not dispute that they agreed to non-competition and non-solicitation covenants in connection with the sale of their business… Read more »

Posted: December 10, 2016

Claim Based on Oral Promise to Pay Employee Fails Where Employee Handbook Required Writing

On December 1, 2016, the First Department issued a decision in Newmark & Co. Real Estate, Inc. v. Frischer, 2016 NY Slip Op. 08100, affirming the dismissal of a claim based on an oral promise to pay an employee a share of the proceeds from an acquisition when the firm’s employee handbook required such promises… Read more »

Posted: November 20, 2016

At-Will Sales Employee Not Entitled to Post-Termination Commissions

On November 18, 2016, the Fourth Department issued a decision in Moore-Haarr v. Z-AXIS, Inc., 2016 NY Slip Op. 07788, holding that a former employee was not entitled to commissions on sales made before her employment ended, explaining: The sales for which plaintiff seeks the commissions were made by defendant, and the goods were shipped… Read more »