Search for: "Loral Corp. v. Moyes (1985)" Results 1 - 17 of 17
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Nov 2018, 12:32 pm by Michael Weil
In rendering its decision, however, the court expressly “doubt[e]d the continuing validity” of Loral Corp. v. [read post]
28 Feb 2019, 9:05 am by James Kachmar
  For instance, in 1985, a California appellate court in Loral Corp v. [read post]
6 Mar 2019, 6:48 am by Nassiri Law
This ruling marked a shift from the 1985 ruling by a California Court of Appeal in Loral Corp. v. [read post]
3 Jul 2007, 3:41 pm
 For instance, in Loral Corp. v. [read post]
9 Apr 2014, 7:28 am by Julie Brook, Esq.
For example, in Loral Corp. v Moyes (1985) 174 CA3d 268, the court upheld a provision in an employee’s termination agreement that the employee would not “disrupt, damage, impair or interfere with his former employer by ‘raiding’ its work-staff” for the 1-year period following termination, concluding that the agreement wasn’t void on its face under Bus & P C §16600. [read post]
9 Apr 2014, 7:28 am by Julie Brook, Esq.
For example, in Loral Corp. v Moyes (1985) 174 CA3d 268, the court upheld a provision in an employee’s termination agreement that the employee would not “disrupt, damage, impair or interfere with his former employer by ‘raiding’ its work-staff” for the 1-year period following termination, concluding that the agreement wasn’t void on its face under Bus & P C §16600. [read post]