| Title | Resource Type | Date | |
| Practice Note: Overview | |||
| 1 | Severance Benefits, Plans and Agreements: Overview This Note provides an overview of the types of severance arrangements available to employers and identifies the issues associated with providing severance benefits. It includes a discussion of severance plan design, the potential application of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), the treatment of severance benefits as welfare plans or pension plans and potential problems in administering severance arrangements. | Practice Note: Overview | Maintained |
| Practice Notes | |||
| 1 | Independent Contractor Classification A Note explaining the independent contractor classification, including the benefits of the classification and the penalties for misclassification. This note addresses federal law. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. | Practice Notes | Maintained |
| 2 | Negotiating and Drafting an Executive Employment ... This Note explains the provisions employers and practitioners should consider when negotiating and drafting executive employment agreements. It discusses common types of compensation arrangements, severance provisions, relevant issues under the Internal Revenue Code and restrictive covenants. It also includes factors to consider when negotiating, including the more stringent regulatory environment and provisions that are viewed unfavorably by shareholders. | Practice Notes | Maintained |
| 3 | Non-compete Agreements with Employees This Note provides an overview of non-compete agreements between employers and employees. Non-compete agreements are largely dependent on state law. This Note contains information that is general and not jurisdiction-specific. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. | Practice Notes | Maintained |
| 4 | Protection of Employers' Trade Secrets and Confidential ... This Note describes trade secrets and confidential information protections available to employers. It examines trade secret definitions and legal recourse, including misappropriation, tortious interference and breach of duty of loyalty and/or fiduciary duty claims. It also explores relevant restrictive covenants and best practices. This Note provides a general overview of federal law in this area. For information on state law, see the State Law Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. | Practice Notes | Maintained |
| 5 | What's Market: Negotiating Executive Employment ... A discussion on negotiating severance payments and benefits in executive employment agreements, which includes links to recently filed employment agreements. This Note will be updated quarterly. | Practice Notes | 31-Mar-2013 |
| 6 | What's Market: Negotiating Executive Employment ... A discussion on negotiating compensation and benefits provisions in executive employment agreements, including links to recently filed employment agreements. This Note will be updated quarterly. | Practice Notes | 31-Mar-2013 |
| Standard Documents | |||
| 1 | Consensual Romance in the Workplace Agreement (Love ... A consensual romance agreement to be signed by two romantically-involved employees representing that their relationship is entirely consensual and acknowledging the employer's anti-harassment policies and rules. This Standard Document is drafted in favor of the employer. It is based on federal law. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. For information on state law requirements for discrimination and harassment, see the State Law Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 2 | Employee Confidentiality and Proprietary Rights Agreement An agreement between an employer and an employee concerning confidentiality and appropriate handling of the employer's commercially valuable information, compliance with relevant security rules and policies, and protection of the employer's intellectual property assets. Agreements of this type have various titles, which may use the term "non-disclosure" in place of "confidentiality," or "intellectual property" in place of "proprietary rights." This Standard Document is drafted in favor of the employer. It is based on federal law. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 3 | Employee Confidentiality and Proprietary Rights Agreement ... A California-specific agreement between an employer and an employee concerning confidentiality and appropriate handling of the employer's commercially valuable information, compliance with relevant security rules and policies, and protection of the employer's intellectual property assets. Agreements of this type have various titles, which may use the term "non-disclosure" in place of "confidentiality," or "intellectual property" in place of "proprietary rights." This Standard Document is drafted in favor of the employer. It is based on California law. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 4 | Employee Non-compete Agreement An agreement between an employer and an employee limiting an employee's competitive activities for a specified period of time after the employment relationship ends. This Standard Document is drafted in favor of the employer. It is jurisdiction neutral. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. For information on state law requirements regarding non-competes and trade secret laws, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 5 | Employee Relocation Expenses Agreement A model relocation expenses agreement for a private employer to use when providing relocation assistance to an employee. This relocation expenses agreement is based on federal law. It has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 6 | Employee Retention Bonus Agreement A model retention agreement, sometimes referred to as a stay bonus agreement, for a private employer to use when offering an employee a retention bonus for remaining with the employer until a specified date. This retention bonus agreement is based on federal law. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 7 | Executive Employment Agreement An agreement specifying the terms and conditions of an executive's employment to be executed by both the employer and the executive. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. It is based on federal law. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 8 | Executive Employment Agreement Term Sheet A model term sheet for employers to use when negotiating an executive employment agreement. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 9 | Expatriate Secondment Letter of Assignment A sample cross-border secondment letter to be used in the expatriate context when a US employee is temporarily assigned to work abroad while remaining employed by the original (actual) employer. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 10 | Independent Contractor/Consultant Agreement (Pro-client) An independent contractor agreement between an independent contractor (a self-employed individual) and a client company for consulting or other services. This Standard Document is drafted in favor of the client company. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 11 | Joint Defense and Confidentiality Agreement An agreement that allows parties with similar legal interests, who are involved in an investigation or legal proceeding, to share information with each other without waiving the attorney-client privilege, work product protection or other applicable privilege or protection. This agreement may also protect against the disqualification of one party's counsel as a result of sharing confidential information with the other parties to the agreement. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 12 | Mutual Agreement to Arbitrate Employment-related Disputes ... This Standard Document provides sample language for a California-specific agreement to arbitrate employment-related claims. This Standard Document has integrated drafting notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 13 | Offer Letter for a Commission Salesperson An offer letter to be used with an employee paid on commission, such as a salesperson or sales representative. This offer letter also can be used as a short-form employment agreement. This Standard Document is intended to be used by private employers with their nonunionized workforce. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. It is based on federal law. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 14 | Offer Letter for a Fluctuating Workweek Employee An offer letter to be used with an employee paid on a fluctuating workweek basis. This offer letter also can be used as a short-form employment agreement. This Standard Document is intended to be used by private employers with their nonunionized workforce. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. It is based on federal law. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 15 | Offer Letter/Employment Agreement for a Non-Executive ... A short-form offer letter/employment agreement containing terms and conditions of employment for a non-executive employee to be executed by both the employer and employee. This Standard Document is intended to be used by private employers with their non-unionized workforce. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanatory and drafting tips. It is based on federal law. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 16 | Offer Letter/Short-form Employment Agreement (California) A California-specific offer letter/short-form employment agreement for a non-executive specifying the terms and conditions of employment to be acknowledged and signed by the employee. It includes provisions addressing at-will, background check and credit report requirements and new pay notice requirements. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanatory and drafting tips. It is based on California law. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 17 | Secondment Agreement (Domestic) This Standard Document is a sample secondment agreement for employers to use when temporarily transferring employees within the US, either to another part of the employer's organization or to an outside organization. This Standard Document is jurisdiction neutral and based on federal law. It has integrated drafting notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 18 | Secondment Letter to Employee for Domestic Transfer A sample secondment letter to be used with an employee being temporarily assigned to work for another entity in the United States, either to another business unit within the employer's organization or externally to another company. This Standard Document is intended to be used by private employers with their nonunionized workforce. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 19 | Separation and Release of Claims Agreement A separation agreement (also commonly referred to as a severance agreement) between an employer and a departing employee specifying terms of the employee's separation from employment, including a release of legal claims against the employer in exchange for a benefit. This Standard Document is drafted in favor of the employer and has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. This Standard Document is based on federal law. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 20 | Separation and Release of Claims Agreement (California) A California-compliant agreement between an employer and a departing employee specifying terms of the employee's separation from employment, including a release of legal claims against the employer in exchange for a benefit. This Standard Document is drafted in favor of the employer. It is based on California law and is intended for use with employees or businesses located in California. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 21 | Unpaid Internship Agreement (Learning Contract) An unpaid internship offer letter and agreement (also known as a learning contract). This letter agreement outlines the terms and conditions of a student's unpaid internship. It helps an employer minimize risk by setting expectations and acknowledging that all of the criteria considered by the Department of Labor (DOL) have been met. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. This Standard Document is drafted in favor of the employer based on requirements under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). For information on requirements under state wage and hour law, see the State Law Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| Standard Clauses | |||
| 1 | Mandatory Arbitration of Employment-related Claims ... This Standard Clause provides sample language for a California-compliant mandatory arbitration provision of employment-related claims. It can be incorporated into a written employment agreement or employee handbook. This Standard Clause has integrated drafting notes with important explanations and drafting tips. For recent updates on class action and jury trial waivers in arbitration agreements, see Related Content on the right. | Standard Clauses | Maintained |
| 2 | Non-compete Provision (California) This Standard Clause provides sample language for a California-compliant non-compete provision in connection with the merger or sale of a business, including its goodwill, as authorized by Sections 16600 to 16602.5 of the California Business and Professions Code. It can be used as a stand-alone provision or incorporated into a written agreement with the seller of a business entity. This Standard Clause has integrated drafting notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Clauses | Maintained |
| 3 | Non-solicitation of Customers (California) This Standard Clause provides sample language for a California-compliant non-solicitation of customers provision. It can be used as a stand-alone provision or incorporated into a written agreement with current or departing employees. This Standard Clause has integrated drafting notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Clauses | Maintained |
| 4 | Non-solicitation of Employees (California) This Standard Clause provides sample language for a California-compliant non-solicitation of employees provision. It can be used as a stand-alone provision or incorporated into a written agreement with current or departing employees. This Standard Clause has integrated drafting notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Clauses | Maintained |
| Checklists | |||
| 1 | Drafting an Employee Confidentiality Agreement: Best ... A Checklist outlining best practices for employers drafting employee confidentiality agreements, sometimes referred to as confidentiality and proprietary rights agreements. This Checklist is jurisdiction neutral. | Checklists | Maintained |
| 2 | Drafting an Employee Non-compete Agreement: Best ... A Checklist outlining best practices for employers drafting non-compete agreements with employees. This Checklist is jurisdiction neutral. For information on state law requirements regarding non-compete agreements, see State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right. | Checklists | Maintained |
| 3 | Terms of an Executive Employment Agreement Checklist This Checklist outlines the provisions that employers and practitioners should consider when negotiating the terms of an executive employment agreement, such as forms of compensation, severance payments and benefits and restrictive covenants. It also sets out relevant design considerations. | Checklists | Maintained |
| 4 | Trade Secrets and Confidential Information Best Practices at ... A Checklist outlining steps employers can take at the beginning of the employment relationship to avoid potential claims from former employers for theft of trade secrets and unfair competition, and to protect the new employer's confidential, proprietary and trade secret information. | Checklists | Maintained |
| 5 | Using Independent Contractors and Outside Firms: Avoiding ... A Checklist of independent contractor classification considerations and practical steps a company can take to minimize the risk of misclassification of employees as independent contractors. This Checklist considers individual workers and using outside firms as independent contractors. It is jurisdiction-neutral. | Checklists | Maintained |
| State Q&A Tool | |||
| 1 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool This tool enables subscribers to search and compare PLC's Employment Claims in Release Agreements State Q&A resources. Questions and answers address state-specific claims to identify in release agreements, to omit from release agreements and more. Simply select the questions and the jurisdictions that you are interested in and click the "Submit" button. To see all of PLC's State Q&As on Employment Claims in Release Agreements, see State Q&A Guide to Employment Claims in Release Agreements. To see all of PLC's State Q&As, including relevant Legal Updates since the publication date (under Related Content), see individual Q&As on the Labor & Employment State Q&As landing page. | State Q&A Tool | -- |
| 2 | Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool This tool enables subscribers to search and compare PLC's Independent Contractors State Q&A resources. Questions and answers address state-specific definitions of independent contractor, benefits of using independent contractors, tests used to assess proper classification, administration/enforcement, penalties and more. Simply select the questions and the jurisdictions that you are interested in and click the "Submit" button. To see all of PLC's State Q&As on Independent Contractors, see State Q&A Guide to Independent Contractors. To see all of PLC's State Q&As, including relevant Legal Updates since the publication date (under Related Content), see individual Q&As on the Labor & Employment State Q&As landing page. | State Q&A Tool | -- |
| 3 | Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool This tool enables subscribers to search and compare PLC's Non-compete Laws State Q&A resources. Questions and answers address state-specific issues of enforcement, drafting, choice of law, reasonableness of restrictions, remedies and more. Simply select the questions and the jurisdictions that you are interested in and click the "Submit" button. To see all of PLC's State Q&As on Non-compete Laws, see State Q&A Guide to Non-compete Laws. To see all of PLC's State Q&As, including relevant Legal Updates since the publication date (under Related Content), see individual Q&As on the Labor & Employment State Q&As landing page. | State Q&A Tool | -- |
| 4 | Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool This tool enables subscribers to search and compare PLC's Trade Secret Law State Q&A resources. Questions and answers cover state-specific definitions of trade secrets, reasonable efforts to maintain secrecy, misappropriation, defenses, remedies and more. Simply select the questions and the jurisdictions that you are interested in and click the "Submit" button. To see all of PLC's State Q&As on Trade Secret Laws, see State Q&A Guide to Trade Secret Laws. To see all of PLC's State Q&As, including relevant Legal Updates since the publication date (under Related Content), see individual Q&As on the Labor & Employment State Q&As landing page. | State Q&A Tool | -- |
| State Q&A | |||
| 1 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Alabama A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Alabama. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 26-Mar-2013 |
| 2 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Arizona A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Arizona. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement, as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 20-Aug-2012 |
| 3 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Arkansas A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Arkansas. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 17-Dec-2012 |
| 4 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: California A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in California. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 11-Feb-2013 |
| 5 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Colorado A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Colorado. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Jul-2012 |
| 6 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Connecticut A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Connecticut. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement, as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 10-Jan-2013 |
| 7 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Delaware A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Delaware. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 11-Jun-2013 |
| 8 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: District of ... A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in the District of Columbia. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-Feb-2013 |
| 9 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Florida A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Florida. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Sep-2012 |
| 10 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Georgia A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Georgia. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Sep-2012 |
| 11 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Idaho A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Idaho. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 12-Jul-2012 |
| 12 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Illinois A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Illinois. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 16-Jan-2013 |
| 13 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Indiana A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Indiana. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 07-May-2012 |
| 14 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Iowa A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Iowa. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 16-Dec-2012 |
| 15 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Kansas A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Kansas. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 18-Apr-2013 |
| 16 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Kentucky A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Kentucky. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-Jun-2012 |
| 17 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Louisiana A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Louisiana. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 04-Apr-2013 |
| 18 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Maine A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Maine. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 06-Nov-2012 |
| 19 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Maryland A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Maryland. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Jan-2012 |
| 20 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Massachusetts A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Massachusetts. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 20-Feb-2013 |
| 21 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Michigan A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Michigan. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 31-Mar-2013 |
| 22 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Minnesota A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Minnesota. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 27-Dec-2012 |
| 23 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Mississippi A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Mississippi. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 14-Feb-2013 |
| 24 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Missouri A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Missouri. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 21-Aug-2012 |
| 25 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Nevada A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Nevada. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 10-Apr-2013 |
| 26 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: New Hampshire A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in New Hampshire. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 08-Nov-2012 |
| 27 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: New Jersey A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in New Jersey. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 18-Dec-2012 |
| 28 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: New Mexico A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in New Mexico. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement, as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 29-Mar-2013 |
| 29 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: New York A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in New York. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Nov-2012 |
| 30 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: North Carolina A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in North Carolina. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 04-Apr-2013 |
| 31 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Ohio A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Ohio. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 13-Feb-2013 |
| 32 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Oklahoma A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Oklahoma. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 29-Mar-2013 |
| 33 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Oregon A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Oregon. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 16-May-2012 |
| 34 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Pennsylvania A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Pennsylvania. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 17-Oct-2012 |
| 35 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Rhode Island A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Rhode Island. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 15-May-2013 |
| 36 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: South Carolina A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in South Carolina. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 18-Mar-2013 |
| 37 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Tennessee A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Tennessee. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 01-Apr-2013 |
| 38 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Texas A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Texas. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 04-Feb-2013 |
| 39 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Utah A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Utah. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 22-Apr-2013 |
| 40 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Virginia A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Virginia. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Jul-2012 |
| 41 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Washington A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Washington. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 30-Apr-2012 |
| 42 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: West Virginia A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in West Virginia. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 18-Dec-2012 |
| 43 | Employment Claims in Release Agreements: Wisconsin A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Wisconsin. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 29-Nov-2012 |
| 44 | Independent Contractors: Alabama A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Alabama. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 01-Apr-2013 |
| 45 | Independent Contractors: Arizona A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Arizona. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 27-Dec-2012 |
| 46 | Independent Contractors: Arkansas A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Arkansas. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Sep-2012 |
| 47 | Independent Contractors: California A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in California. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). For a recent update on California's agreement with the DOL to reduce misclassification of employees as independent contractors, see the Related Content section on the right-hand side. | State Q&A | 19-Oct-2012 |
| 48 | Independent Contractors: Colorado A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Colorado. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 10-Jan-2013 |
| 49 | Independent Contractors: Connecticut A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Connecticut. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 12-Aug-2012 |
| 50 | Independent Contractors: Delaware A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Delaware. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Jun-2013 |
| 51 | Independent Contractors: District of Columbia A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in the District of Columbia. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 01-Mar-2013 |
| 52 | Independent Contractors: Florida A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Florida. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 04-Mar-2013 |
| 53 | Independent Contractors: Georgia A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Georgia. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 24-Sep-2012 |
| 54 | Independent Contractors: Idaho A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Idaho. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Jun-2012 |
| 55 | Independent Contractors: Illinois A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Illinois. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 24-Jan-2013 |
| 56 | Independent Contractors: Indiana A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Indiana. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 21-Mar-2012 |
| 57 | Independent Contractors: Iowa A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Iowa. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 01-Apr-2013 |
| 58 | Independent Contractors: Kansas A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Kansas. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 29-Mar-2013 |
| 59 | Independent Contractors: Kentucky A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Kentucky. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 21-Mar-2013 |
| 60 | Independent Contractors: Louisiana A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Louisiana. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 09-Apr-2013 |
| 61 | Independent Contractors: Maine A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Maine. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 15-Mar-2013 |
| 62 | Independent Contractors: Maryland A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Maryland. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 20-Dec-2012 |
| 63 | Independent Contractors: Massachusetts A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Massachusetts. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Apr-2013 |
| 64 | Independent Contractors: Michigan A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Michigan. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 11-Jul-2012 |
| 65 | Independent Contractors: Mississippi A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Mississippi. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 06-Feb-2013 |
| 66 | Independent Contractors: Missouri A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Missouri. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 19-Jun-2012 |
| 67 | Independent Contractors: Nebraska A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Nebraska. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-Sep-2012 |
| 68 | Independent Contractors: Nevada A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Nevada. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 30-Nov-2012 |
| 69 | Independent Contractors: New Hampshire A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in New Hampshire. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 19-Sep-2012 |
| 70 | Independent Contractors: New Jersey A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in New Jersey. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 20-Feb-2013 |
| 71 | Independent Contractors: New York A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in New York. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 11-Oct-2012 |
| 72 | Independent Contractors: North Carolina A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in North Carolina. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 01-Apr-2013 |
| 73 | Independent Contractors: Ohio A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Ohio. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 22-Feb-2013 |
| 74 | Independent Contractors: Pennsylvania A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Pennsylvania. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-Jan-2013 |
| 75 | Independent Contractors: South Carolina A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in South Carolina. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Sep-2012 |
| 76 | Independent Contractors: Tennessee A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Tennessee. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 15-Nov-2012 |
| 77 | Independent Contractors: Texas A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Texas. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 06-Jun-2012 |
| 78 | Independent Contractors: Utah A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Utah. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 27-Mar-2013 |
| 79 | Independent Contractors: Virginia A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Virginia. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or muncipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-May-2013 |
| 80 | Independent Contractors: Washington A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Washington. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 21-Feb-2013 |
| 81 | Independent Contractors: West Virginia A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in West Virginia. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 16-Nov-2012 |
| 82 | Non-compete Laws: Alabama A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Alabama. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 07-Feb-2013 |
| 83 | Non-compete Laws: Arizona A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Arizona. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Nov-2012 |
| 84 | Non-compete Laws: Arkansas A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in the Arkansas. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 03-Dec-2012 |
| 85 | Non-compete Laws: California A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in California. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 08-Mar-2013 |
| 86 | Non-compete Laws: Colorado A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Colorado. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 12-Feb-2013 |
| 87 | Non-compete Laws: Connecticut A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Connecticut. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 23-Jan-2013 |
| 88 | Non-compete Laws: District of Columbia A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in the District of Columbia. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 03-Aug-2012 |
| 89 | Non-compete Laws: Florida A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Florida. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 11-Jun-2012 |
| 90 | Non-compete Laws: Georgia A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Georgia. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 24-Sep-2012 |
| 91 | Non-compete Laws: Idaho A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Idaho. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Jun-2012 |
| 92 | Non-compete Laws: Illinois A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Illinois. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 27-Mar-2013 |
| 93 | Non-compete Laws: Indiana A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Indiana. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 30-Mar-2012 |
| 94 | Non-compete Laws: Iowa A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Iowa. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 18-Mar-2013 |
| 95 | Non-compete Laws: Kansas A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Kansas. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 31-Jan-2013 |
| 96 | Non-compete Laws: Kentucky A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Kentucky. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 26-Mar-2013 |
| 97 | Non-compete Laws: Louisiana A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Louisiana. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answer to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 13-Jun-2013 |
| 98 | Non-compete Laws: Maryland A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Maryland. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answer to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 19-Apr-2013 |
| 99 | Non-compete Laws: Massachusetts A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Massachusetts. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 29-Aug-2012 |
| 100 | Non-compete Laws: Michigan A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Michigan. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants, such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 23-Apr-2013 |
| 101 | Non-compete Laws: Minnesota A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Minnesota. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Mar-2013 |
| 102 | Non-compete Laws: Mississippi A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Mississippi. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 26-Nov-2012 |
| 103 | Non-compete Laws: Missouri A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Missouri. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answer to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 30-Apr-2012 |
| 104 | Non-compete Laws: Nebraska A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Nebraska. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 24-Sep-2012 |
| 105 | Non-compete Laws: Nevada A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Nevada. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 19-Dec-2012 |
| 106 | Non-compete Laws: New Hampshire A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in New Hampshire. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 29-Nov-2012 |
| 107 | Non-compete Laws: New Jersey A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in New Jersey. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 22-Oct-2012 |
| 108 | Non-compete Laws: New York A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in New York. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 12-Jun-2013 |
| 109 | Non-compete Laws: North Carolina A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in North Carolina. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Feb-2013 |
| 110 | Non-compete Laws: Ohio A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Ohio. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). For an update on the recent decision of the Ohio Supreme Court that a merger triggers the running of a non-compete clock, see Related Content to the right. | State Q&A | 16-Jan-2013 |
| 111 | Non-compete Laws: Oklahoma A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Oklahoma. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-May-2012 |
| 112 | Non-compete Laws: Oregon A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Oregon. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 30-Apr-2012 |
| 113 | Non-compete Laws: Pennsylvania A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Pennsylvania. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Nov-2012 |
| 114 | Non-compete Laws: South Carolina A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in South Carolina. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Feb-2013 |
| 115 | Non-compete Laws: Tennessee A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Tennessee. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 17-Sep-2012 |
| 116 | Non-compete Laws: Texas A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Texas. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 04-Mar-2013 |
| 117 | Non-compete Laws: Utah A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Utah. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answer to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 29-Aug-2012 |
| 118 | Non-compete Laws: Virginia A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Virginia. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Jan-2013 |
| 119 | Non-compete Laws: Washington A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Washington. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 14-Jan-2013 |
| 120 | Non-compete Laws: West Virginia A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in West Virginia. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 19-Dec-2012 |
| 121 | Non-compete Laws: Wisconsin A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Wisconsin. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 12-Dec-2012 |
| 122 | Trade Secret Laws: Alabama A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Alabama. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 02-May-2012 |
| 123 | Trade Secret Laws: Arizona A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Arizona. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Nov-2012 |
| 124 | Trade Secret Laws: Arkansas A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Arkansas. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 07-Jun-2013 |
| 125 | Trade Secret Laws: California A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in California. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 01-Jun-2012 |
| 126 | Trade Secret Laws: Colorado A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Colorado. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 13-Jun-2013 |
| 127 | Trade Secret Laws: Connecticut A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Connecticut. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 09-May-2013 |
| 128 | Trade Secret Laws: District of Columbia A Q&A guide to trade secrets and confidentiality law for private employers in the District of Columbia. This Q&A addresses the District of Columbia definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements related to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 30-May-2013 |
| 129 | Trade Secret Laws: Florida A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Florida. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 07-May-2012 |
| 130 | Trade Secret Laws: Georgia A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Georgia. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 08-May-2013 |
| 131 | Trade Secret Laws: Idaho A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Idaho. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 13-Jul-2012 |
| 132 | Trade Secret Laws: Illinois A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Illinois. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 02-May-2012 |
| 133 | Trade Secret Laws: Indiana A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Indiana. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Mar-2013 |
| 134 | Trade Secret Laws: Iowa A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Iowa. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 27-Mar-2013 |
| 135 | Trade Secret Laws: Kansas A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Kansas. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 11-Feb-2013 |
| 136 | Trade Secret Laws: Kentucky A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Kentucky. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 27-Jun-2012 |
| 137 | Trade Secret Laws: Louisiana A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Louisiana. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 26-Sep-2012 |
| 138 | Trade Secret Laws: Maryland A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Maryland. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). For a recent update on Maryland's new User Name and Password Privacy Protection and Exclusions law, see Related Content on the right. | State Q&A | 25-Mar-2013 |
| 139 | Trade Secret Laws: Massachusetts A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Massachusetts. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 01-Jun-2012 |
| 140 | Trade Secret Laws: Michigan A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Michigan. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 31-May-2013 |
| 141 | Trade Secret Laws: Minnesota A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Minnesota. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-May-2013 |
| 142 | Trade Secret Laws: Mississippi A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Mississippi. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 24-Oct-2012 |
| 143 | Trade Secret Laws: Missouri A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Missouri. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 04-May-2012 |
| 144 | Trade Secret Laws: Nevada A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Nevada. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 24-Sep-2012 |
| 145 | Trade Secret Laws: New Hampshire A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in New Hampshire. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 19-Dec-2012 |
| 146 | Trade Secret Laws: New Jersey A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in New Jersey. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 08-Jan-2013 |
| 147 | Trade Secret Laws: New York A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in New York. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secrets Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 01-Jun-2012 |
| 148 | Trade Secret Laws: North Carolina A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in North Carolina. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 24-Aug-2012 |
| 149 | Trade Secret Laws: Ohio A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Ohio. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 01-Jun-2012 |
| 150 | Trade Secret Laws: Oklahoma A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Oklahoma. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 23-Apr-2013 |
| 151 | Trade Secret Laws: Oregon A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Oregon. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 30-Apr-2012 |
| 152 | Trade Secret Laws: Pennsylvania A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Pennsylvania. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 07-Aug-2012 |
| 153 | Trade Secret Laws: South Carolina A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in South Carolina. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 30-Apr-2012 |
| 154 | Trade Secret Laws: Tennessee A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Tennessee. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 19-Sep-2012 |
| 155 | Trade Secret Laws: Texas A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Texas. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). On May 2, 2013, Texas enacted the Texas Uniform Trade Secrets Act, which takes effect on September 1, 2013 and replaces the common law governing trade secret misappropriation. For a recent update on this development, see Related Content on the right. | State Q&A | 01-Jun-2012 |
| 156 | Trade Secret Laws: Utah A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Utah. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 30-Apr-2012 |
| 157 | Trade Secret Laws: Virginia A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Virginia. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 26-Sep-2012 |
| 158 | Trade Secret Laws: Washington A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Washington. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 02-Aug-2012 |
| 159 | Trade Secret Laws: West Virginia A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in West Virginia. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 07-Dec-2012 |
| 160 | Trade Secret Laws: Wisconsin A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Wisconsin. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-Feb-2013 |
| Articles | |||
| 1 | Experts' View: Trends in Executive Severance Arrangements This Article includes an expert Q&A with J. Mark Poerio and Luke P. Iovine, III of Paul Hastings LLP on recent trends in executive severance arrangements. This Article also includes a comparison chart of recent executive employment agreements contained in PLC What's Market, with summaries of some of their relevant severance provisions. | Articles | 22-Jan-2013 |
| 2 | Enforcing Arbitration Agreements in California and Beyond Since the US Supreme Court's 2011 decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, courts have taken a variety of approaches to enforcing employment arbitration agreements. This article analyzes the state of post-Concepcion case law in California and in other parts of the country. | Articles | 01-Dec-2012 |
| 3 | What's Market: Executive Employment Agreements: Post ... This Article discusses post-termination non-competition provisions in executive employment agreements. It includes an analysis of the law in California, Florida, Illinois, New York and Texas on the reasonableness of duration and geographic scope restrictions, as well as examples of recent executive employment agreements with links to each underlying agreement. This Article also includes an expert Q&A with Katherine E. Perrelli of Seyfarth Shaw LLP, discussing considerations for employers with an online presence and the use of other types of restrictive covenants. | Articles | 01-May-2012 |
| 4 | Executive Employment Agreements After the Dodd-Frank Act ... An expert Q&A with Andrea S. Rattner of Proskauer Rose LLP on the impact of the Dodd-Frank Act on executive employment agreements and the influence of shareholder advisory groups' proxy voting guidelines on companies that are required to submit their executive compensation programs to a say on pay vote. | Articles | 31-Dec-2011 |
| 5 | Drafting cross-border employment contracts This chapter considers the extent to which a standard cross-border employment contract can be drafted to comply with the laws of more than one jurisdiction, focusing on the laws of France, Germany, Italy and the UK. This article is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to labour and employee benefits. For a full list of contents visit www.practicallaw.com/labourhandbook. | Articles | 15-Feb-2010 |
| 6 | Severance negotiations: current international trends This chapter considers current trends in the termination of employees, particularly in the negotiation of severance and compromise agreements, in Finland, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the UK (England and Wales). | Articles | 01-Jun-2008 |
| Updates | |||
| 1 | Jackson Lewis: H-1B Work Visa Application Established ... This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses the New York State Supreme Court Appellate Division, Second Department's April 17, 2013 holding in Kausal v. Educational Products Information Exchange Institute that an H-1B work visa application established an employment contract sufficient to support the employee’s breach of contract claim. The court ruled that the application, sworn-to and executed by the employer's project manager, contained all of the material terms indicating an employment contract and left nothing to be further negotiated. The court noted that the contract violations were also federal labor violations, as the employer failed to pay the employee the wages indicated on the visa application. | Legal Update: archive | 09-May-2013 |
| 2 | Where to Turn When You Are Having Secondment Thoughts Resources to assist employers that are considering secondment arrangements or drafting secondment agreements. | Legal Update: archive | 22-Feb-2013 |
| 3 | Disclaimer in Mandatory Arbitration Policy for Nonunion ... In Supply Technologies, LLC, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) held that an employer's mandatory arbitration policy governing employment disputes for nonunion workers would be reasonably construed to interfere with employees' Section 7 rights in spite of a disclaimer allowing employees to bring and participate in government actions. | Legal Update: archive | 21-Dec-2012 |
| 4 | Epstein Becker: Wisconsin Court Determines Non-compete ... This Law Firm Publication by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. discusses a Wisconsin Court of Appeals decision in Engedal v. Menard, Inc., upholding an arbitration provision in an employment agreement that included a non-compete clause. After Menard, Inc. (Menards) terminated Jeffrey Engedal, he sued, requesting a declaratory judgment that the provision was unenforceable. The circuit court held the arbitration provision was unconscionable because the non-compete clause would put Engedal out of a job for two years if he refused to sign it. The Wisconsin Court of Appeals reversed, holding the circuit court's decision conflicted with its own findings that Menards would have offered Engedal a different position in the company if he refused to sign the agreement, his managerial, supervisory and organization skills were transferable outside the industry, and Engedal was subsequently able to find a job as a general manager for a company in another industry. | Legal Update: archive | 14-Dec-2012 |
| 5 | State Court Should Leave Enforceability of Noncompetes to ... The US Supreme Court ruled in Nitro-Lift v. Howard that by declaring the noncompetition agreements in two employment contracts null and void, rather than leaving that determination to the arbitrator, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ignored the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA)'s national policy favoring arbitration. | Legal Update: archive | 27-Nov-2012 |
| 6 | Jackson Lewis: California Court Rules Drivers' Independent ... This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses Elijahjuan v. Superior Court, in which the California Court of Appeal held that owner-operator truck drivers were not required to arbitrate their state law misclassification claims. Although the parties' agreements contained a clause requiring arbitration in all disputes arising from the "application or interpretation" of the agreements, the court held that the drivers' California Labor Code claims fell outside the scope of that provision, as they concerned statutory rights rather than an interpretation of contractual rights. One justice dissented, arguing that arbitration clauses have been consistently interpreted as applying to extra-contractual disputes. | Legal Update: archive | 23-Oct-2012 |
| 7 | Ogletree Deakins: Ohio Reduces Statute of Limitations for ... This Law Firm Publication by Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. discusses Ohio's new eight year statute of limitations for claims based on written contracts. This law also applies retroactively to claims that accrued before September 28, 2012, the new law's effective date, provided they are brought within eight years after the cause of action accrued. The statute of limitations for written contract claims was previously 15 years from the time of breach. | Legal Update: archive | 17-Oct-2012 |
| 8 | Jackson Lewis: Employee Must Arbitrate Individual Wage ... This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses the California Court of Appeal's decision in Nelsen v. Legacy Partners Residential, Inc., ruling that an employee must arbitrate her individual wage and hour claims against her employer where an arbitration agreement between the parties was not unconscionable or in violation of public policy. Notably, the court rejected the employee’s argument that the agreement was unenforceable because it violated federal public policy under the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) decision in D.R. Horton. The court found that the issues in D.R. Horton were outside the expertise of the NLRB, that the holding had been rejected by at least two other federal courts, and that there was no evidence that the plaintiff in Nelsen was covered by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). | Legal Update: archive | 31-Jul-2012 |
| 9 | Epstein Becker: Illinois Appellate Court Holds Only Material ... This Law Firm Publication by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C., discusses the Illinois Appellate Court's recent decision in InsureOne Independent Insurance Agency LLC v. Hallberg, reiterating that only a party's material breach of a contract that contains a restrictive covenant excuses the other party from the restriction. James Hallberg hired 29 of his former employer's employees and directly competed with the former employer, breaching the restrictive covenants in his employment agreement with the employer. The court found that although the employer may have breached the employment agreement as well, a partial breach by one party did not justify the other party's failure to perform. | Legal Update: archive | 11-Jul-2012 |
| 10 | Jackson Lewis: California Court of Appeal Enforces Class ... This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses a California Court of Appeal's decision in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation upholding a class action waiver in an arbitration agreement and distinguishing the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) decision in D.R. Horton. The court followed AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, noting Concepcion made no exception for employment-related disputes in reiterating the general rule that arbitration agreements must be enforced according to their terms. The court also held the arbitration agreement barred the plaintiff from bringing claims under the California Private Attorney General Act (PAGA). | Legal Update: archive | 04-Jun-2012 |
| 11 | PF Chang's Arbitration Agreement with Class Action Waiver ... The US District Court for the Northern District of California recently upheld an arbitration agreement containing a class action waiver, holding that AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, which articulates a strong federal policy of enforcing arbitration agreements, controls. The court distinguished D.R. Horton, Inc., finding the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) does not bar enforcement of agreements to arbitrate non-NLRA claims on an individual basis. | Legal Update: archive | 14-May-2012 |
| 12 | Epstein Becker: New York Caps Executive Compensation & ... This Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. memorandum discusses an Executive Order requiring state agencies to issue regulations imposing caps on executive compensation and administrative costs on for-profit and not-for-profit service providers that receive State-authorized financial assistance or payments. New York's Governor, Andrew M. Cuomo, executed the Order on January 18, 2012, to prevent public funds from being diverted to excessive compensation and unnecessary administrative costs. The new limitations imposed by the Executive Order may adversely affect hospitals and other service providers especially Medicaid-managed healthcare plans. | Legal Update: archive | 30-Jan-2012 |
| 13 | Arbitration Provision with Class and Collective Action Waiver ... In LaVoice v. UBS Financial Services, Inc., the US District Court for the Southern District of New York granted a motion to compel arbitration of the plaintiff's Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and state wage and hour claims despite a class and collective action waiver. The court found AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, precluded LaVoice's argument that the FLSA creates an unwaivable right to collective actions. Notably, the court rejected the argument that D.R. Horton, Inc. supported a contrary reading of AT&T Mobility. | Legal Update: archive | 23-Jan-2012 |
| 14 | Mandatory Arbitration Agreement Prohibiting Class and ... The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) recently held that requiring employees, as a condition of employment, to sign an arbitration agreement prohibiting them from filing collective or class actions for employment-related claims violates the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). In its January 3, 2012 decision in D.R. Horton, Inc., the NLRB also held that its decision does not conflict with the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and distinguished AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion. | Legal Update: archive | 10-Jan-2012 |
| 15 | New Jersey Trade Secrets Act Signed by Governor The New Jersey Trade Secrets Act has been signed into law by Governor Christie. This law creates specific remedies for employers to protect trade secrets from misappropriation. | Legal Update: archive | 10-Jan-2012 |
| 16 | New California Employment Laws Effective on January 1 ... A list of new California employment-related laws effective on January 1, 2012 and covering areas such as pay notices, credit checks, pregnancy disability leave and independent contractors, among others. | Legal Update: archive | 29-Dec-2011 |
| 17 | Musicians Are Not Independent Contractors Despite ... The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) held that musicians are employees rather than independent contractors of a symphony orchestra. In its December 27, 2011 decision in Lancaster Symphony Orchestra, the NLRB found the musicians to be employees using the common law agency test, because the employer controlled all manner of performance and scheduling after the musicians agreed to play. Member Hayes dissented. | Legal Update: archive | 28-Dec-2011 |
| 18 | Ogletree Deakins: Illinois Supreme Court Rejects Use of Rigid ... This Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. memorandum discusses Reliable Fire Equipment Company v. Arredondo, in which the Illinois Supreme Court held that courts may not use rigid, structured tests in determining whether a legitimate business interest exists as they analyze the enforceability of non-competition restrictive covenants. This decision resolves a split among the Illinois appellate courts. | Legal Update: archive | 06-Dec-2011 |
| 19 | Ogletree Deakins: Virginia Supreme Court Reverses 22-year ... This Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. memorandum discusses the Virginia Supreme Court's opinion in Home Paramount Pest Control Companies, Inc. v. Shaffer. In this decision, the Virginia Supreme Court held that a non-compete clause in an employment agreement was overbroad and unenforceable because it prohibited the employee from working for a competitor "in any manner whatsoever." This decision reverses long-standing precedent, under which the Virginia Supreme Court previously held that identical language was enforceable. | Legal Update: archive | 22-Nov-2011 |
| 20 | Jackson Lewis: Maine Employer's Failure to Update Non ... This Jackson Lewis LLP memorandum discusses the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit's ruling in OfficeMax, Inc. v. Levesque. Analyzing the case under Maine law, the court held that a one year non-compete clause had expired by the time the employer tried to enforce it more than a year after its predecessor in interest acquired the company that had initially obtained the non-compete agreement. The court reversed the grant of preliminary injunction and remanded the case. | Legal Update: archive | 10-Nov-2011 |
| 21 | New California Laws Covering Credit Reports, Pay Notices ... New employment laws cover areas such as consumer credit reports, penalties for willful independent contractor misclassification, written commission agreements and pay information notices for newly hired employees, among other areas. | Legal Update: archive | 11-Oct-2011 |
| 22 | Jackson Lewis: California Supreme Court Rules that ... This Jackson Lewis LLP memorandum discusses the August 22, 2011 California Supreme Court ruling in Seabright Ins. v. US Airways. The court held that independent contractors' employees may not sue either the contractor or the party that hired the contractor for injuries sustained on the job, even if the workplace injury was caused by the party's non-compliance with workplace safety requirements. The court reasoned that when a party hires an independent contractor, the hiring party implicity delegates any tort law duty to protect the contractor's employees by complying with workplace safety requirements. | Legal Update: archive | 26-Sep-2011 |
| 23 | One-person Employment Contract Not an ERISA Plan: Eighth ... In Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad Corporation v. Schieffer, the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ruled that a one-person employment contract is not a plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). However, the court held that a federal court may still have jurisdiction over portions of the complaint and remanded the case with instructions for addressing ERISA preemption. | Legal Update: archive | 15-Aug-2011 |
| Other Resources | |||
| 1 | Redact | Glossary | Maintained |
Copyright © 2013 Practical Law Publishing Limited and Practical Law Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Use of PLC websites and services is subject to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy