Articles Posted in Business Law

MIAMI BUSINESS LITIGATION: NON-COMPETE AGREEMENTS AND “CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION”
Mavrick Law Firm

Under Florida law, enforcement of a non-compete agreement requires requires proof of at least one “legitimate business interest.” Fla. Stat. § 542.335 (“The person seeking enforcement of a restrictive covenant shall plead and prove the existence of one or more legitimate business interests justifying the restrictive covenant.”). A failure to plead or prove the existence…

Continue reading ›
MIAMI BUSINESS LITIGATION: CONTRACT “LIQUIDATED” DAMAGES
Mavrick Law Firm

Liquidated damages are determinable with exactness from the cause of action as pleaded by a mathematical calculation or by application of a rule of law. Boulos v. Yung Sheng Xiamen Yong Chem. Indus. Co., 855 So.2d 665 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). Many contracts contain a liquidated damage provision that attempts to ascribe an automatic amount…

Continue reading ›
FORT LAUDERDALE BUSINESS LITIGATION: TRADE SECRET DAMAGE OPTIONS
Mavrick Law Firm

A trade secret plaintiff usually will consider potential damages to be recovered from the defendant, and how you will present evidence to a jury establishing those damages. This aspect of a trade secret lawsuit is not always straight-forward because a trade secret plaintiff is entitled to different damage categories depending on the facts and circumstances…

Continue reading ›
FORT LAUDERDALE BUSINESS LITIGATION: GOODWILL AS BASIS FOR A NON-COMPETE AGREEMENT
Mavrick Law Firm

A party seeking to enforce a restrictive covenant must plead and prove the existence of one or more legitimate business interests. Fla. Stat. § 542.335. The proponent typically claims to have a legitimate business interest in its trade secrets, valuable confidential information that otherwise does not qualify as a trade secret, substantial relationships with specific…

Continue reading ›
MIAMI BUSINESS LITIGATION: THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARY TO CONTRACT
Mavrick Law Firm

Standing is a legal concept requiring the litigant bringing the lawsuit to have a sufficient stake in the outcome of the controversy that enables the litigant to judicially resolve the controversy. Jamlynn Invs. Corp. v. San Marco Residences of Marco Condo. Ass’n, 544 So. 2d 1080 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). The standing concept imposes a…

Continue reading ›
FORT LAUDERDALE BUSINESS LITIGATION: NON-PUBLIC COMPILATIONS OF CLIENT LISTS CAN BE PROTECTED TRADE SECRETS
Mavrick Law Firm Team

In business litigation, a business’ customer information can qualify as a trade secret under Florida and Federal law. This trade secret protection extends further than just a business’ list of customers. A business’ cognizable trade secrets can include a different elements of customer information that are compiled in the aggregate and protected by business. The…

Continue reading ›
MIAMI BUSINESS LITIGATION: CHOICE OF LAW AND LITIGATION OF CLAIMS OF FRAUD
Mavrick Law Firm Team

Florida businesses that enter into contracts will often place “choice of law” provisions within their contracts. There provisions typically govern which state or country’s laws apply to a given transaction. These clauses are usually enforced by the courts, with some exceptions. While states generally share the same fundamental rules of contract law, the choice of…

Continue reading ›
FORT LAUDERDALE BUSINESS LITIGATION: RESCISSION OF A CONTRACT
Mavrick Law Firm Team

Florida businesses may seek rescission of a contract in certain circumstances when the contract was entered into because of fraud, accident, or a mistake of facts. To preserve the legal right to invoke the remedy of rescission, when the basis for rescission is discover must immediately reject any further benefits under the contract and must…

Continue reading ›
MIAMI BUSINESS LITIGATION: DECEPTIVE AND UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES AND “PASS-THROUGH” CHARGES
Mavrick Law Firm Team

The Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA) provides a means for customers to sue a business which deceptively charges additional fees. When a business conducts itself in an unlawful, unfair, or deceptive manner to its own customers, the business’ competitor may also assert a FDUTPA claim for the harm that these practices indirectly…

Continue reading ›
FORT LAUDERDALE BUSINESS LITIGATION: DECEPTIVE AND UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES AND “PASS-THROUGH” CHARGES
Mavrick Law Firm Team

Another article discusses how a business can lawfully sue a competitor under the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA) when the competitor issues deceptive charges against its own customers. Several recent cases have explained that whether a charge is unlawfully deceptive is highly dependent on the exact language of the charge. Minor nuances…

Continue reading ›

Client Testimonials

A few months ago our company was in need of a Labor Law Attorney and we were very lucky to have found Peter Mavrick. He is a great attorney, he maneuvered through a rather complex Employers Liability case advocating against the opposition and protecting our company and personal interests. He was...

C.Y.

Peter Mavrick successfully defended our company in a federal court jury trial. The jury ruled our way in a lawsuit by a person claiming our company owed him overtime wages. Mr. Mavrick “out-lawyered” the opposing lawyer and handled the case like our company was his own family’s business.

Business owner Arthur P.

For years, Mr. Mavrick has provided sound advice to my business and he provided excellent representation in a business lawsuit. He is highly responsive and his legal knowledge, skill, and advice are excellent.

Business owner Preston M.

Peter Mavrick successfully defended my company and me in a non-competition covenant lawsuit that sought an injunction that would have effectively shut down my business. Mr. Mavrick energetically handled the case like it was his own. He got the case dismissed with no liability and saved the business...

Business owner Kevin W.

Contact Us

Fill out the contact form or call us at 954-564-2246 or 305-570-4042 to schedule your consultation.

Leave Us a Message