wheelrite
14 years ago

"I am always amazed by how quickly people will draw conclusions with little more than marginal information. Prudence prevents me from getting into details about this situation. I will however offer a few items for consideration. The Oliva Cigar Co is not a big conglomerate, it is a small family owned business. The consistency of actions by the family and the company throughout the years should carry some weight when hasty generalizations are being made. For years Oliva has provided world class cigars at reasonable prices, even when the economy allowed for gouging. We have sought to bring new and innovative products to the genuine aficionado and to always advance our craft. Furthermore, the actual facts of the matter are not being sought by those eager to draw conclusions. Consider that a judge heard facts that you have not and ruled accordingly. Consider also that during the course of future trials many more facts will be divulged. The life’s work of an honorable family and company should be considered. However, if that is not compelling enough, those who have taken an interest in this dispute should follow the litigation closely. Some patience may save you some “egg on the face” as well as surprise you."

Jose Oliva


from a site that cannot be named

donutboy2000 wrote:



Midgetporn.com ?
robertknyc
14 years ago
Wrong forum outrage!
puffytstogie
14 years ago
How does a non compete clause work when the employee is terminated? I would think a company couldn't hire an employee, use his ideas, then dump the employee and expect he wouldn't go work somewhere else?
rfenst
14 years ago

How does a non compete clause work when the employee is terminated? I would think a company couldn't hire an employee, use his ideas, then dump the employee and expect he wouldn't go work somewhere else?

puffytstogie wrote:




Please tell me you don't believe that this doesn't happen in the business world...

The key is "consideration" in the contractual sense. If there was any, the non-compete agreement would still be binding. The key, however, is that each state has its own laws, which may vary significantly.
puffytstogie
14 years ago
I know it happens, that is why I asked the question. This was not a case of the employee leaving to start his own little company competing against his former employer. I was wondering if his chances are better because of what happened?
rfenst
14 years ago

I know it happens, that is why I asked the question. This was not a case of the employee leaving to start his own little company competing against his former employer. I was wondering if his chances are better because of what happened?

puffytstogie wrote:



May depend if he had an employment contract or was an employee at will. If he was fired without cause, I would tend to think so.

Remember, legal action to enforce the non-compete is usually not for damages. It is an action in "Equity".

Equitable actions not only concern the contents of the written non-compete, but also the general concept of fairness, which ideally should be a major reason for whatever the court decides.

Now, if there is a "reasonable" liquidated damages clause associated with the non-compete, the employee probably has less of a chance of prevailing and the employer could get an order enjoin the employee and a monetary award for breach of contract.

Notwithstanding all of this, remember that each state's laws are different and each case is different (as is each judge).
Users browsing this topic