It is difficult to ignore the ongoing national debate—within the federal and certain state governments—over the use and enforcement of post-employment restrictive covenants. It is within that landscape that Delaware’s Court of Chancery recently issued its memorandum opinion in Hightower Holding v. Gibson, C.A. No. 2022-0089-LWW (February 9, 2023) addressing the applicability of a Delaware choice-of-law clause in certain agreements that contained restrictive covenants, including a covenant not to compete (the covenant).

In denying plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction, Vice Chancellor Lori Will found that the plaintiff had not established a reasonable probability of success on the merits of the claim (that the defendant was in breach of the covenant) after holding that Alabama law, rather than Delaware law applied, and that the covenant was likely void under Alabama law. In so ruling, the vice chancellor found that “Alabama’s strong interests against enforcing the covenants outweigh Delaware’s contractarian policies.”

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]