A recent decision from U.S. District Court in the District of Minnesota provides some guidance as to when a plaintiff may assert a claim of breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing under Minnesota law even if the claim is tangential to an employment relationship. In Hampton v. Koehler, No. 18-541 (DWF/TNL) […]
Minnesota’s Merger, Conversion, and Domestication of Business Entity Laws Revised
On April 30 2018, Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton signed into law H.F. No. 2764 as Session Laws Chapter No. 103 (the “Act”). Previously, the Act was unanimously approved by both the Minnesota House and Senate. The adoption of the Act, like the Revised Minnesota Limited Liability Company Act, brings Minnesota business law more in line […]
Playing Defense: How Trademark Protection Can Enhance and Protect Your Brand
Many people may know that the use of the term Super Bowl® is protected by the National Football League (NFL®) . Professional football actually provides many examples of the use of trademarks to protect valuable brands. The Minnesota Vikings® and Philadelphia Eagles® – both registered trademarks in their own right – applied for trademark protection for slogans used […]
Federal Consumer Review Fairness Act Bars Non-Disparagement Clauses in Consumer Contracts
In this age of internet trolls, Yelp, Facebook, and Google reviews, businesses may be tempted to consider requiring customers to sign non-disparagement clauses in standard contracts so as to prevent harm to their commercial reputation from negative on-line posts and reviews. This practice was increasingly common up through 2016. That year, however, Congress passed and President […]
Minnesota Employment Agreement Claim Reversed, Remanded by Eighth Circuit
A judgment in favor of a terminated employee to the tune of one million dollars on his claim of breach of a five-year employment agreement was reversed by a panel of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals and sent back for further review in Qwinstar Corporation v. Anthony, 882 F.3d 748 (8th Cir. 2018). The Qwinstar case serves as an instructive example of […]
Minnesota Court of Appeals Clarifies Scope of Qualified Privilege Defense to Defamation Claims
In Maethner v. Someplace Safe, Inc., No. A17-0998 (Minn. Ct. App. Feb. 12, 2018), the Minnesota Court of Appeals held that defamatory statements about criminal conduct by the plaintiff made by an award recipient at a fundraising banquet and in an article published for fundraising purposes was not protected by a qualified privilege. The appellant, […]
U.S. Department of Labor Announces New Test for Unpaid Internships
On January 5, 2018, the U.S. Department of Labor (“U.S. DOL”) announced it is adopting a new, more flexible, seven-factor test for determining when interns are employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and therefore subject to minimum wage and overtime pay requirements. You can read the announcement here. By doing so, the U.S. […]
Municipal Non-Compete Ordinances – Could it Happen in Minnesota?
Two employment law topics I follow closely, non-competes and city rule-making in the area of employment law, intersected this summer when it was announced that New York City is considering a local law restricting non-compete agreements. In recent years, there has been a proliferation of city rule-making in the area of employment law, as well […]
8th Circuit Ruling on Iowa Non-Competes Raises Interesting Implications
The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals recently weighed in on Iowa law regarding non-competes, and its holding has interesting implications for attorneys in Iowa, and in other states like Minnesota. In Ag Spectrum Co. v. Elder, 865 F.3d 1088 (8th Cir. 2017), the Court held that enforceability and reasonableness of a non-compete provision is a […]
Minnesota Court Holds Non-Compete Agreement Presented on First Day Not Enforceable
In Safety Center, Inc. v. Stier, 903 N.W.2d 896 (Minn. Ct. App. 2017), the Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s decision declining to enforce a non-compete agreement presented to the employee on her first day of employment because the employee previously received an offer letter purporting to “confirm” her acceptance of the position before […]
- « Previous Page
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- …
- 10
- Next Page »