The proponent of a trade secret must prove the information was “the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy.” Fla. Stat. § 688.02. Simply instructing another not to divulge the information is probably insufficient. Glob. Marine Expl., Inc. v. Republic of France, 696 F. Supp. 3d 1131 (N.D. Fla.…
Continue reading ›An anticipatory breach (also known as anticipatory repudiation) of a contract occurs when a party, by words or actions, repudiates a contract prior to the time of performance. Under Florida law, anticipatory breach can be asserted as a cause of action for damages, or as a defense to a breach of contract claim. The pivotal…
Continue reading ›A key recurring issue in defending employers against employment discrimination claims is the requirement that the former employee exhaust administrative remedies. Florida laws governing employment discrimination, including the Florida Civil Rights Act and Florida county ordinances, require the employee to file charge of discrimination with an “administrative agency,” i.e., a government agency that processes and…
Continue reading ›A company suing for trade secret misappropriation should be cognizant of whether it must prove ownership over the trade secret. Some trade secret statutes require ownership to establish the claim, while other statutes do not. For example, a Florida business can probably sue for trade secret misappropriation under the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA)…
Continue reading ›It is a good practice for businesses to require its employees to sign restrictive covenants, such as non-compete and confidentiality agreements, to protect trade secrets or confidential business information. If an employee breaches the restrictive covenant, the business could file a lawsuit against the employee to enforce the restrictive covenant. To succeed in the lawsuit,…
Continue reading ›We recently wrote articles on a litigant’s ability to recover prevailing party attorney’s fees under the American Rule. The Rule prohibits attorney’s fees unless they are authorized by statutes or by a contract provision. Q.H. v. Sunshine State Health Plan, Inc., 305 So. 3d 543 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020) (“Under the American rule, a court…
Continue reading ›Restrictive covenants, such a non-compete and non-solicitation agreements, are important tools for businesses to protect their business interests. Restrictive covenants are enforceable if they are reasonable in time, geographic area, line of business, and supported by a “legitimate business interest.” Fla. Stat. § 542.335. Legitimate business interests can include protection of substantial relationships with specific…
Continue reading ›Earlier this week we explored the American Rule and its prohibitions against recovering attorney’s fees unless a contractual provision or statute permits the prevailing party to recover those attorney’s fees. We also explored two difficulties that can arise when a party seeks to recover his or her attorney’s fees under a statute. The first difficulty…
Continue reading ›Recovering attorney’s fees is governed by the American Rule. This rule generally prohibits a party from recovering his or her attorney’s fees unless the fees are expressly permitted pursuant to a contract, statue, or rule. Q.H. v. Sunshine State Health Plan, Inc., 305 So. 3d 543 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020) (“Under the American rule, a…
Continue reading ›It is important for employers to properly classify their employees as exempt or non-exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, if an employee works more than forty hours in a week, the employee must be paid an overtime rate of at least 1.5 times their regular hourly rate…
Continue reading ›
