On TV.com: PARIS HILTON shows off Christmas spirit
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 12 of 21:
Next »
« Previous
Evidence must be properly evaluated, or else it's worthless
Remember Loverock: evidence must be evaluated according to the laws of the State assuming jurisdiction of a case. Your understanding of this dictum seems very weak. One cannot be said to agree to a contract that is on its face illegal. Such a contract can be ruled invalid and therefore non-binding.

If a contract's jurisdiction is moved from an employer-friendly State to an employee-friendly State, then there's a good chance that certain terms will be found illegal and render the contract non-binding. That's the essence of Google's strategem: assume California has jurisdiction and that the contract is then illegal under California law, since California is particularly critical of non-compete agreements and what the terms they can contain. In California, Google's chances are 60/40 to winning because the law favours Lee.

Your certainty in your assertion should that the contract will hold up in court should therefore be substantially reduced as well as your assertion of whose butt will be kicked. The evidence must be evaluated under the relevant State law otherwise any conclusion is just your personal opion.

Actual mileage may vary. Personally I'll bicycle on this case. I don't know the result and I have not yet ascertained why I should care. However, I do care when people assume that a contract is valid and enforceable once signed. Such is a dangerous assumption, since it flies in the face of the law in some locales.
Posted by: John Le'Brecage   Posted on: 09/07/05 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Where's Anton?  Richard Flude | 09/06/05
Nice evidence!  ShadeTree | 09/07/05
That's what it is: evidence!  John Le'Brecage | 09/07/05
Deterrence from leaving versus incentive to stay  hsuwh | 09/07/05
Bad publicity from this suit will discourage the best from working at MS  DonnieBoy | 09/07/05
Will discourage, has discouraged, and is discouraging  hsuwh | 09/07/05
Lawyers spar at Microsoft-Google hearing  Loverock Davidson | 09/07/05
And you base this on?  John Le'Brecage | 09/07/05
On the evidence  Loverock Davidson | 09/07/05
It is a FACT that Lee signed the agreement. But,  DonnieBoy | 09/07/05
No BUT to it...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 09/07/05
Evidence must be properly evaluated, or else it's worthless  John Le'Brecage | 09/07/05
And even in the proper State.  John Le'Brecage | 09/07/05
And, MS could win the case, but lose the public relations battle.  DonnieBoy | 09/07/05
depends on what they are loosing  john.gruber@... | 09/07/05
Microsoft is just playing right into Googles hand here.  DonnieBoy | 09/07/05
Keep dreaming...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 09/07/05
The opinion on the stret is that Google is in, Microsoft is out.  DonnieBoy | 09/07/05
that claim  Real World | 09/08/05
Nothing new  nomorems | 09/07/05
Trying to sully Google's rep  hsuwh | 09/07/05

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
Premier Vendor Content Whitepapers, webcasts & resources from our Power Center Sponsors
advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here