www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Lawrence Rosen" <lro...@rosenlaw.com>
Subject RE: Important California court decision
Date Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:26:37 GMT
> This is a pretty significant decision. Larry, I read the following
> statement and I wonder how likely it really is that federal courts
> will utilize California's interpretation?:
> 
> 'Federal courts are likely to fall in line now that California's
> highest court has interpreted the law.'

Don't read too much into this statement. Employment contracts are generally
state law disputes, even when the battle is fought (for other reasons) in
federal court. So what this means is that the federal courts will likely
follow the California Supreme Court (and now, California law!) when deciding
federal cases in California under California law. 

This need not affect laws or cases in other states or other federal courts
not in California. But the California Supreme Court is quite influential in
California and elsewhere.

I don't think you need to move back to California though. Colorado law may
be just as good.

/Larry



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruce Snyder [mailto:bruce.snyder@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 4:59 PM
> To: legal-discuss@apache.org; lrosen@rosenlaw.com
> Subject: Re: Important California court decision
> 
> On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 2:46 PM, Lawrence Rosen <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>
> wrote:
> > "Court says employer can't limit a departing worker's job future"
> >
> > http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-
> bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/07/BAUH12716R.DTL&feed=rss.bayarea
> 
> This is a pretty significant decision. Larry, I read the following
> statement and I wonder how likely it really is that federal courts
> will utilize California's interpretation?:
> 
> 'Federal courts are likely to fall in line now that California's
> highest court has interpreted the law.'
> 
> Also, I already live in Colorado which, as I learned recently,
> recognizes very few conditions where non-comps apply. How might this
> affect such states as Colorado?
> 
> Bruce
> --
> perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-
> N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
> );'
> 
> Apache ActiveMQ - http://activemq.org/
> Apache Camel - http://activemq.org/camel/
> Apache ServiceMix - http://servicemix.org/
> 
> Blog: http://bruceblog.org/


---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only.  Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF.  See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message