Legal Articles, General Practice

Is it Illegal for an Employer to Terminate Someone While They Are out on Disability Leave in Connecticut?

An agreement containing a restrictive covenant is an agreement in which one party agrees to limit his conduct in exchange for a benefit.  Two common types of restrictive covenants include agreements not to compete and agreements not to solicit.  A non-competition agreement is a contract that an individual, often an employee, enters into with another party, often an employer, in which the individual agrees not to offer or engage in services that are competitive with the other party.  A non-solicitation agreement is a contract in which an individual, often an employee, enters into with another party, often an employer, in which the individual agrees not to poach employees and/or clients of the other party. Non-competition and non-solicitation agreements may be beneficial to employers because they offer protection for their business models, clients, and/or employees, which they may have spent years developing and training.

What Does It Mean if My Employee is Subject to Income Withholding in Connecticut?

In Stay Alert Safety Services, Inc. v. Fletcher, 2005 Conn. Super. LEXIS 1915, Mr. Christopher Fletcher began to work at United Rentals, Inc., a North Carolina company in the traffic safety and control industry, starting in February 2003.  He signed an employment agreement upon accepting the job offer wherein the agreement contained a non-compete provision.   According to the restrictive provisions, he was prohibited from working at a competing company located within two hundred miles for a period of two years after his termination.

Grayling Associates, Inc. v. Villota, 2004 Conn. Super. LEXIS 1859

Express Courier Systems, Inc. v. Brown, 2006 Conn. Super. LEXIS 3784

Hoffnagle v. Henderson, 2002 Conn. Super. LEXIS 901

Connecticut Stone Supplies, Inc. v. Fresa, 2002 Conn. Super. LEXIS 4141

Integrated Corporate Relations, Inc. v. Bidz, Inc., 2009 Conn. Super. LEXIS 2212

In a divorce action, the Superior Court of Connecticut, Judicial District of Stamford-Norwalk at Stamford declared, as a marital asset subject to division, a business the husband formed and from which he officially retired but continued working for thereafter. The plaintiff wife and defendant husband were married for thirty-eight (38) years and resided in Stamford. The husband was the primary breadwinner and controlled finances within the marriage. Among a number of businesses and properties in which the husband held interest was one he formed in the early 1990s.