T.J.T., Inc. v. Mori

2 Analyses of this case by attorneys

  1. California Court Of Appeal Finds That Non-Competition Agreement Contained In Employment Agreement Is Unenforceable Against Former Seller/Employee Even Though It Was Executed In Connection With The Sale Of A Business

    Seyfarth Shaw LLPRobert B. MilliganAugust 27, 2012

    (3) This is only one Court of Appeal decision and other decisions may support a different result. This case’s holding that the non-competition covenant in the employment agreement did not fall under section 16601 because it focused on the “right to pursue a profession” appears to conflict with the Idaho Supreme Court in T.J.T., Inc. v. Mori (Id. 2011) 266 P.3d 476 (applying California law) and other California decisions. The Idaho Supreme Court in T.J.T. found that a two-year non-compete agreement executed in connection with the sale of a business was enforceable under California law, despite the fact that the seller also became an employee of the purchasing company as a result of the sale.

  2. Can The Seller Of A Business Who Also Becomes Employed By Purchaser Be Held To Non-Compete Agreement Under California Law? The Idaho Supreme Court Says Yes

    Seyfarth Shaw LLPDecember 14, 2011

    By Molly JoyceThe Idaho Supreme Court, in the case of T.J.T., Inc. v. Mori, 2011 WL 5966870, No. 37805 (Id. Nov. 30, 2011), recently found that a two-year non-compete agreement executed in connection with the sale of a business was enforceable under California law, despite the fact that the seller also became an employee of the purchasing company as a result of the sale. The Idaho high court also remanded the case for consideration of whether the non-compete agreement’s overbroad geographic restriction could be “blue-penciled” to comply with California law.