New Jersey may not be able to keep its government up and running, but it can protect its in-house counsel – remember this the next time you are tempted to make "Joisey" jokes or ask the perennial favorite "You’re from New Jersey? What exit?". Read on for more details on Opinion 708:
"Fourteen years after the state Supreme Court told firms they could not limit defecting partners’ practices, New Jersey’s ethics gurus have extended the doctrine to in-house lawyers.
In Opinion 708, made public last week, the Supreme Court’s Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics struck down a proposed employment agreement limiting the right of in-house lawyers at Florham Park’s BASF Corp. to move to competitors.
The opinion applies to all the state’s companies.
No-compete covenants are unethical under Rule of Professional Conduct 5.6 because they deny clients’ rights to counsel of their choice. Companies that want to woo away a competitor’s in-house lawyers have the same right, according to the opinion."
Link: Non-Competes Stricken for In-House Counsel.
Like this post? Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter. Unsubscribe at any time.
Other posts:
- Article Providing In-House Counsel Focus on Code Section 409A
- Patent Ownership Considerations For In-House Counsel
- Freelance Attorneys: A Valuable Alternative For In-House Counsel…Sometimes
- ALM’S Law.Com Launches New Web News and Resource Center for In-House Counsel
- Inhouse Whistleblowers: Retaliatory Discharge of Inhouse Counsel
