Legal Articles, Employment

How To Defeat A Non-Compete In Connecticut

So you are locked into a non-compete agreement, or are you? Here at Maya Murphy, P.C. in Westport, CT, our employment law attorneys have been enforcing and beating non-competes for over a decade. With experience in both New York and Connecticut tribunals, our employment law group has seen it all when it comes to non-competes. Below are just a few of the many ways our attorneys have poked holes in non-compete agreements and freed our clients from their restraint.

Non-Compete Invalidated Due To Unnecessary Restrictions On Future Employment

Connecticut Bathworks Corp. V. Palmer, 2003 Conn. Super. LEXIS 2193

Termination Does Not Invalidate A Non-Compete Agreement

Built In America, Inc. V. Morris, 2001 Conn. Super. LEXIS 2953

What Is A ‘Hostile Work Environment’ In Connecticut?

What Is A ‘Hostile Work Environment’ In Connecticut?

What Is Employment Discrimination In Connecticut?

What Is Employment Discrimination In Connecticut?

What Is Sexual Harassment In Connecticut?

What Is Sexual Harassment In Connecticut?

What Should an Employee Do if He/She Has Been Sexually Harassed in Connecticut?

What Should an Employee Do if He/She Has Been Sexually Harassed in Connecticut?

What Should an Employee Do if His/Her Employer Retaliates Against Him/Her for Reporting Discrimination in Connecticut?

What Should an Employee Do if His/Her Employer Retaliates Against Him/Her for Reporting Discrimination in Connecticut?

Denial of Additional Shifts Could Constitute Adverse Action for Retaliation Claim under Title VII

In a U.S. District Court decision, the Court found that a restaurant’s denial of an employee’s opportunity to work additional shifts could satisfy the adverse action requirement to support a Retaliation claim under Title VII. [1]

Employee Alleging Quid Pro Quo Harassment Could Not Show Her Termination Was Linked to Sexual Relations with Employer

In a Connecticut case from the Judicial District of Stamford-Norwalk, where a female employee was sexually involved with her employer, her claims of quid pro quo harassment and constructive discharge were dismissed because she could not demonstrate sex was an implicit condition of her employment and the cessation of their relations caused her termination.[1]

Legal Articles Additional Disclaimer

Lawyer.com is not a law firm and does not offer legal advice. Content posted on Lawyer.com is the sole responsibility of the person from whom such content originated and is not reviewed or commented on by Lawyer.com. The application of law to any set of facts is a highly specialized skill, practiced by lawyers and often dependent on jurisdiction. Content on the site of a legal nature may or may not be accurate for a particular state or jurisdiction and may largely depend on specific circumstances surrounding individual cases, which may or may not be consistent with your circumstances or may no longer be up-to-date to the extent that laws have changed since posting. Legal articles therefore are for review as general research and for use in helping to gauge a lawyer's expertise on a matter. If you are seeking specific legal advice, Lawyer.com recommends that you contact a lawyer to review your specific issues. See Lawyer.com's full Terms of Use for more information.

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-620-0900

Call me for fastest results!
800-620-0900

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-620-0900

By submitting this lawyer request, I confirm I have read and agree to the Consent to Receive Messages from all messaging and voice technologies including Email, Text, Phone, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy. Information provided is not privileged or confidential.