Forfeitures-for-Competition (and other breached loyalty covenants)
>>> see also:U.S. state-by-state noncompete index
2018.09.21 Executives Behaving Badly - Remedies for Wronged Employers. The fact pattern is not atypical: a senior executive allegedly misled his employer into paying him excessive bonuses. In the face of executive wrongdoing, employers typically pursue a variety of state law tort claims in order to recover their damages. For a sense of the possible claims, and their basic elements, see Northstar v. Alberto (E.D. VA, 7/31/2018). In that decision, a federal court in the Eastern District of Virginia held that --
2017.01.10 Top Hat Forfeiture Enforced for Executive's Refusal to Sign Non-Compete (WD Penn). As a general matter, employers win when they seek to enforce the unambiguous terms -- and forfeiture provisions - of their top hat and other executive-only ERISA plans. Good faith administration by the employer is ordinarily sufficient. Case in point: a Penn. district court upheld forfeiture of top hat benefits where an executive refused to sign a non-competition agreement that the underlying plan required as a condition for benefits. See Sikora v. UPMC (WD Penn, 1/10/2017) for a comprehensive discussion of federal decisions examining (1) the standard of review for litigation involving non-qualified plans, and (2) the circumstances under which courts will enforce forfeiture provisions under top hat plans. Also: see the court's 2015 decision for a review of case law relating to ERISA's top hat plan exemption, and the percentage of a workforce that may participate without destroying top hat status.
Litigation re Executive Compensation
Conflicts of Law
U.S. STATE LAW
Stock Options Forfeitable due to Competition?
MI and NE:
MI and NE:
Copyright © Joseph Poerio. All rights reserved.