The economic loss doctrine bars a plaintiff from recovering certain money damages under a tort theory (e.g. negligence, products liability, property damage, etc.) where a contract defines his relationship with a defendant. “Economic loss” means (i) damages for inadequate value, (ii) costs of repair and replacement of the defective product, (iii) loss of profits (without …
Author Archives: PaulP
Federal TRO Practice – The Legitimate Interest, Near-Permanence and Balance of Harms Test: Cumulus v. Olson – Part II of III
Cumulus Radio v. Olson, 2015 WL 643345 also discusses the legitimate business interest test, what constitutes an adequate remedy at law and the balance of harm elements of injunctive relief under Illinois law. To determine whether a given restrictive covenant is reasonable, the court examines whether (1) the plaintiff has shown a legitimate business interest, (2) …
“Will It Play in Peoria?!”: Fed. Court Casts Doubt on Continued Vitality of ‘Two – Year Rule’ to Enforce Non-Compete
Fifield v. Premier 2013 IL App (1st) 120327 is (was?) an important case in employment law circles for cementing the “two year rule”: two years of continuous employment is the bare minimum length of at-will employment required for an employer to enforce a restrictive covenant. From the employer’s vantage point, the rule was troubling since it …