In one of its first rulings of the 2012-13 term, the U.S. Supreme Court has issued an opinion involving arbitration of noncompete agreements.
In Nitro-Lift Technologies, L.L.C. v. Howard, the High Court ruled that the Oklahoma Supreme Court failed to adhere to a correct interpretation of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). The U.S. Supreme Court decision vacated the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s decision, which had determined that noncompete agreements in two employment contracts were null and void. According to the U.S. Supreme Court, it was for an arbitrator—not the state court—to decide whether the covenants-not-to-compete were valid as a matter of state law. (Nitro-Lift Technologies, L.L.C. v. Howard, No. 11–1377, U.S. Supreme Court, 2012)
The underlying decision involved two employees, Eddie Lee Howard and Shane D. Schneider, who worked for Nitro-Lift Technologies, a nitrogen-generating company with opera...(register to read more)
- Protect against retaliation suits by conducting independent and 'blind' internal investigations
- In Allentown, who says one vote doesn't matter?
- Whistle-blowers protected even if they defy complaint process
- Prior workers' comp case? Make sure discharge reasons are plausible
- The Dirty Dozen: Manager mistakes that spark lawsuits