Looks like eDig did argue that California law was applicable in their motion for summary judgement on the non-compete.
"...e.Digital counters that California has a fundamental interest in preventing the enforcement of non-competition clauses against its residents..."
The court did comment that both Washington and Utah both are similar in nature regarding non-compete
"...Moreover, Washington’s interest in enforcing promises not to compete is relatively weak. Utah, as the forum state, also has only a weak policy preference to enforce non-compete agreements..."
"3
Even if Washington law were to be applied, as digEcor urges, the prospects of enforcing
the 2002 NDA’s non-competition provisions as written would be dim. Washington law requires
that limits on competition be reasonable in duration and geographic scope. See, e.g., Perry v.
Moran, 748 P.2d 224, 230-31 (Wash. 1987) and Sheppard v. Blackstock Lumber Co., Inc., 540
P.2d 1373, 1376 (Wash. 1975). The court has serious doubts that Paragraph 1, 4, 5 and 6 of the
2002 NDA, with their uncertainty, inconsistency and expansive scope, would survive a
reasonableness inquiry."
Found this in doc 324 at Silvers box.
Coyote
"3
Even if Washington law were to be applied, as digEcor urges, the prospects of enforcing
the 2002 NDA’s non-competition provisions as written would be dim. Washington law requires
that limits on competition be reasonable in duration and geographic scope. See, e.g., Perry v.
Moran, 748 P.2d 224, 230-31 (Wash. 1987) and Sheppard v. Blackstock Lumber Co., Inc., 540
P.2d 1373, 1376 (Wash. 1975). The court has serious doubts that Paragraph 1, 4, 5 and 6 of the
2002 NDA, with their uncertainty, inconsistency and expansive scope, would survive a
reasonableness inquiry."
Found this in doc 324 at Silvers box.
Coyote
Even if Washington law were to be applied, as digEcor urges, the prospects of enforcing
the 2002 NDA’s non-competition provisions as written would be dim. Washington law requires
that limits on competition be reasonable in duration and geographic scope. See, e.g., Perry v.
Moran, 748 P.2d 224, 230-31 (Wash. 1987) and Sheppard v. Blackstock Lumber Co., Inc., 540
P.2d 1373, 1376 (Wash. 1975). The court has serious doubts that Paragraph 1, 4, 5 and 6 of the
2002 NDA, with their uncertainty, inconsistency and expansive scope, would survive a
reasonableness inquiry."
Found this in doc 324 at Silvers box.
Coyote
Even if Washington law were to be applied, as digEcor urges, the prospects of enforcing
the 2002 NDA’s non-competition provisions as written would be dim. Washington law requires
that limits on competition be reasonable in duration and geographic scope. See, e.g., Perry v.
Moran, 748 P.2d 224, 230-31 (Wash. 1987) and Sheppard v. Blackstock Lumber Co., Inc., 540
P.2d 1373, 1376 (Wash. 1975). The court has serious doubts that Paragraph 1, 4, 5 and 6 of the
2002 NDA, with their uncertainty, inconsistency and expansive scope, would survive a
reasonableness inquiry."
Found this in doc 324 at Silvers box.
Coyote
