A business dispute in Michigan may provide insight into the consideration required to support a noncompete contract restricting future employment. Innovation Ventures, LLC v. Liquid Manufacturing, LLC, No. 150591, Michigan Supreme Court (July 24, 2016).
Contracts containing restrictive covenants prohibiting certain types of competition are commonplace in employment and business contracts. Because these agreements are contracts, Michigan courts have not historically looked into the sufficiency of consideration, since the longstanding Michigan rule is that sufficiency of consideration is not a matter for legal review. The Michigan Supreme Court, in a 2002 case, has commented that a “cent or a pepper corn, in legal estimation, would constitute a valuable consideration.” Essentially, this means that courts refrain from evaluating the quality of the deal, i.e., whether it was good or bad for one party.
This underpinning has been the basis for court holdings stating that in Michigan continued at-will employment is sufficient consideration to support noncompete restrictive covenants. Other states have deviated from this rule. Notably, an important Illinois decision held that employment alone is insufficient consideration to support a restrictive covenant agreement unless the employment continues for two years or more, even if the agreement is signed when the employee is hired. Fifield v. Premier Dealer Services, Inc., 2013 IL App (1st) 120327.
Factual Background
In the recent Michigan case, Innovations Ventures, LLC v. Liquid Manufacturing, LLC, the parties engaged in business under a verbal agreement. Later the parties decided to memorialize their relationship with a written contract. The agreement provided for continued business relations plus a new confidentiality provision and a new noncompete provision. Within days, Innovations Ventures cancelled the contract and, after the 14-day notice period, the business relationship ended. Thereafter, Liquid Manufacturing began competing and Innovations Venture brought suit.
Many issues were raised in litigation, however, this article will focus only on those portions dealing with required consideration for the noncompete agreement. The trial court granted summary judgment for the defendants on the theory that there was insufficient consideration. The court of appeals upheld the lower court’s decision, but focused itself upon failure of consideration. The court of appeals wrote, “discontinuation of the business/employment relationship within two weeks of the signing of agreements constituted a failure of consideration.”
Michigan Supreme Court’s Holding
The Michigan Supreme Court reversed the lower courts’ decisions, ruling that sufficient consideration existed and there was no failure of consideration. Its reasoning was straight to the point on both fronts. Sufficient consideration existed because one side agreed to continued business and, in exchange, the other agreed to a noncompete restriction. Plainly, the Michigan Supreme Court really means that a cent or a peppercorn constitutes consideration—and so does the mere assent to engage in business with another. The failure of consideration argument was likewise quickly swatted aside. The court noted that failure of consideration generally arises when the side that committed the first material breach tries to enforce the agreement against the other party. Therefore, in the Innovation Ventures situation, there was no first material breach because the contract itself stated that a party could terminate the contract at any time without cause. In the court’s eye the “Agreement[s] were not void for a failure of consideration because the parties exercised their rights as plainly contemplated by the contract.”
Key Takeaways
A footnote in the decision specifically states that the decision was limited to contracts between sophisticated businesses. The court wrote, “We decline to address . . . whether failure of consideration applies to at-will employees who sign a noncompete agreement after at-will employment has started.” Nevertheless, the theory and argument could have application to the employment situation and it may prove to be difficult to factually distinguish employment contracts from the case’s scope. Specifically, Innovation Ventures could be argued to stand for the proposition that when employment may be terminated at will, there is no failure of consideration when the employer exercises that contractual right—no matter how soon the termination occurs after the parties enter into the contract.
For more information, follow the source link below.
Insight
Restrictive Covenants in Michigan: A Cent, a Peppercorn, or Continued At-Will Employment
The Michigan Supreme Court, in a 2002 case, has commented that a “cent or a pepper corn, in legal estimation, would constitute a valuable consideration.” Essentially, this means that courts refrain from evaluating the quality of the deal, i.e., whether it was good or bad for one party.
Related Articles
Staunch Competition
by Andrea E. Nieto, Catherine H. Molloy and Jennifer W. Corinis
On the other side of the pandemic, after record numbers of employee resignation, protecting trade secrets is both challenging and being challenged.
Midwest In the Law
by Gregory Sirico
We examine five court cases that are ongoing in Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Minnesota and Indiana.
The Best Lawyers in the Midwest
by Best Lawyers
Our 2022 Best Lawyers in the Midwest Digital publication features top-ranked legal talent, including Best Lawyers and Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America throughout six Midwest states.
The Quest for Smarter, Better RFPs
by Anne Forkner
A law firm that cannot meet deadlines, stay within page limits, and answer all parts of a question in an RFP is providing important information regarding the firm’s ability to meet client requirements.
Trending Articles
Announcing the 2023 The Best Lawyers in America Honorees
by Best Lawyers
Only the top 5.3% of all practicing lawyers in the U.S. were selected by their peers for inclusion in the 29th edition of The Best Lawyers in America®.
Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America for 2023
by Best Lawyers
The third edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America™ highlights the legal talent of lawyers who have been in practice less than 10 years.
Announcing the 2023 The Best Lawyers in Canada Honorees
by Best Lawyers
The Best Lawyers in Canada™ is entering its 17th edition for 2023. We highlight the elite lawyers awarded this year.
Announcing the 2022 Best Lawyers® in the United States
by Best Lawyers
The results include an elite field of top lawyers listed in the 28th Edition of The Best Lawyers in America® and in the 2nd Edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America for 2022.
Famous Songs Unprotected by Copyright Could Mean Royalties for Some
by Michael B. Fein
A guide to navigating copyright claims on famous songs.
Announcing the 2022 Best Lawyers in Canada™
by Best Lawyers
The results include an elite field of top lawyers listed in the 16th Edition of The Best Lawyers in Canada™ and 1st Edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in Canada.
Choosing a Title Company: What a Seller Should Expect
by Roy D. Oppenheim
When it comes to choosing a title company, how much power exactly does a seller have?
What the Courts Say About Recording in the Classroom
by Christina Henagen Peer and Peter Zawadski
Students and parents are increasingly asking to use audio devices to record what's being said in the classroom. But is it legal? A recent ruling offer gives the answer to a question confusing parents and administrators alike.
Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in Canada 2023
by Best Lawyers
The year 2023 marks the second edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in Canada, highlighting professionals earlier in their legal careers all across Canada.
All Eyes to the Ones on the Rise
by Rebecca Blackwell
Our 2023 honorees recognized in Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch™ in America tell us more about how their path to law formed, what lead them to their practice areas and how they keep steadfast in their passion to serve others.
The Real Camille: An Interview with Johnny Depp’s Lawyer Camille Vasquez
by Rebecca Blackwell
Camille Vasquez, a young lawyer at Brown Rudnick, sat down with Best Lawyers CEO Phillip Greer to talk about her distinguished career, recently being named partner and what comes next for her.
Caffeine Overload and DUI Tests
by Daniel Taylor
While it might come as a surprise, the over-consumption of caffeine could trigger a false positive on a breathalyzer test.
Announcing the 2022 "Best Law Firms" Rankings
by Best Lawyers
The 2022 “Best Law Firms” publication includes all “Law Firm of the Year” recipients, national and metro Tier 1 ranked firms and editorial from thought leaders in the legal industry.
Wage and Overtime Laws for Truck Drivers
by Greg Mansell
For truck drivers nationwide, underpayment and overtime violations are just the beginning of a long list of problems. Below we explore the wages you are entitled to but may not be receiving.
Announcing The Best Lawyers in Australia™ 2023
by Best Lawyers
The results include an elite field of top lawyers and firms from Australia.
Press and Publicity: How Television and Social Media Impact Legal Careers
by Justin Smulison
In recent years, with social media giving minute by minute reporting, many lawyers are finding themselves thrust into a spotlight they never planned for. How are lawyers grappling with unexpected stardom, media coverage and merciless influencers?
