• 1 Post
  • 63 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: July 31st, 2023

help-circle


  • Found another article with more information:

    The court found that the FTC’s effort to implement the rule likely exceeds its congressional authorization under the FTC Act and constitutes an arbitrary and capricious approach to the issue of regulating non-competes.

    Rather than issue a nationwide injunction barring enforcement of the rule across the country, the court’s ruling is limited to the parties in the case.

    The court intends to issue a final ruling on the merits by August 30, 2024, before the FTC rule is set to go into effect. The court’s subsequent ruling may prevent the ultimate implementation of the rule on a national level.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/natlawreview.com/article/federal-district-court-grants-preliminary-injunction-against-ftc-rule-banning-non%3Famp

    So basically If I understand this correctly, the court is slapping the FTC for jurisdiction and saying “until further ruling Ryan LLC can legally use their non compete clauses”.

    So the judge has a vague notion to rule against the FTC but it’s not clear if they do or if it’s gonna have national consequences, as this could just as well be a case specific ruling.

    So yeah, the indicators lean a little bit towards non competes staying legal, but we’re still way out from knowing what will happen.


  • Yes.

    Under employment laws you can quit basically at any time with given notice and you can apply to any job no matter who you are or what you did before. The non compete clauses are always part of the employment contract. Usually, what’s in the contract is binding, but: there’s things that might be voided upon examination. Here things like consideration and unconscionability come into play. I assume this clause would be ruled unconscionable against employment laws, therefore the clause is basically removed from contracts after the fact and precedent allows for it to be voided upon future use.

    employment laws > contract law. That’s all it boils down to I assume, just what weighs more.

    A lot of European countries allow only very limited non compete clauses or none at all. Moving in that direction is not really without precedent, so there’s your legal argument.

    Also obligatory IANAL, if you think I’m wrong and you got sources, please correct me. I wanna learn what I don’t know.







  • As a German, the contrast in education and training for police is unfathomable. Yes, we still have a problem with some cops being Nazis, but cops don’t kill people because “I was scared” here. They usually kill them after an act of terrorism that killed a lot more people, or if they had a standoff for like 2h and the guy has a gun.

    Which absolutely is the better way.

    But ofc, banning guns is really helpful in the first place, because wouldn’t you know, banning a killing device rapidly decreases the amount of killings. Funny how that works. I would even argue it’s cause and effect and not just coincidental.




  • Yeah been following the rust cases closely.

    Kari Morrissey was the one who secured the conviction for Hannah Gutierrez Reid.

    Important things to note for Alec Baldwin’s case: he’s got more money and resources for his defense. There’s a bunch of high class attorneys that entered appearance for Baldwin. But he has 2 major problems: those attorneys are not from new Mexico. A good lawyer knows the law and a great lawyer knows the judge. Additionally, he is known for being bad at safety and security. That was already becoming clear in HGR’s trial. But legally things are bad as well: he held the weapon. Now in other states that doesn’t make him more culpable than HGR, but in new Mexico basically everyone holding a weapon is held accountable for the consequences of whatever they do while holding the weapon. This, together with what I would predict are looking like pretty bad facts for him rn, is an indication that he has a steep climb to make, unless Morrissey fucks up in a major way.