Forfeitures for Competition and/or Disloyalty
Conflicts of Law
2012.Jan.15 It is “a fundamental California policy . . . to protect its workers” – This quote comes from Ruiz v. Affinity Logistics (9th Cir. 2/2012), which further states that:
2012.Jan.15 Stock Claims by Executives Fall to Straightforward Contract Terms. The 4th Circuit has affirmed dismissal of a former employee’s claim seeking recovery of unvested equity awards (Kunda v C.R. Bard, Inc.), with the court rejecting Kunda's arguments that Maryland law applied despite the stock plan's designation of New Jersey law as controlling.
2011.July.14 Capital Accumulation. As the U.S. First Circuit's decision notes, "the plaintiffs' claims rehash unsuccessful claims brought by the plaintiffs in In re Citigroup, Inc. Capital Accumulation Plan Litigation, 535 F.3d 45 (2008). The notable difference between the two cases—namely, the applicable state law in the 2008 case was that of Florida and Georgia, while in this case it is the law of Colorado and Louisiana—does not change our view of the merits of those claims." See In re: Citigroup.
U.S. STATE LAW:
Stock Options Forfeitable due to Competition?
Copyright © Joseph Poerio. All rights reserved.