Our colleague Peter A. Steinmeyer—co-leader of our Non-Competes, Unfair Competition, and Trade Secrets service team at Epstein Becker Green—has a Trade Secrets & Noncompete Blog post that will be of interest to many of our readers: “Ambiguous Allegations, Lack of Imminent Harm, and a Delay in Taking Action Doom Request for a Temporary Restraining Order.”
Following is an excerpt:
In Bridgeview Bank Group v. Meyer, the Illinois Appellate Court recently affirmed the denial of a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) against an individual who joined a competitor and then, among other things, allegedly violated contractual non-solicitation and confidentiality obligations. …
Practitioners can take several lessons from this case. First, when it comes to requests for injunctive relief, time is of the essence. Second, when drafting a complaint, even though a plaintiff must take care not to unwittingly publish trade secrets or other confidential information, enough detail must be provided to establish the necessary elements for injunctive relief. Finally, to justify the powerful remedy of an injunction, the requesting party must be able to demonstrate imminent harm, and its claims must be supported by competent evidence.