Skip to content

menu

Open Legal Blog Archive logo
HomeAboutBlogsFAQsSubmit

Company Could Proceed With Interference Claims Against Competitor That Hired Away Its Employees

By Tony Oncidi on May 1, 2007

CRST Van Expedited v. Werner Enterprises, 479 F.3d 1099 (9th Cir. 2007)

CRST sued Werner Enterprises, claiming Werner had interfered with the employment contracts CRST had with two of its truck drivers whom CRST had trained at its expense. The Ninth Circuit reversed the dismissal of CRST’s contractual interference claim on the ground that CRST had properly alleged the necessary elements of such a claim – and that the additional element of an “independently wrongful act” did not have to be alleged because the employees were employed pursuant to a one-year employment contract and were not terminable at will when Werner hired them. Similarly, the Court concluded that CRST had properly alleged a violation of the Unfair Competition Law (California Business & Professions Code § 17200) and, additionally, intentional interference with prospective economic advantage. Finally, the Court affirmed an award of $8,750 in attorney’s fees to Werner under the Uniform Trade Secrets Act on the ground that the trade secrets claim that CRST had initially filed and “informally withdrawn” had been brought in bad faith in violation of California Civil Code § 3426.4.

  • Posted in:
    Employment & Labor
  • Blog:
    California Employment Law Update
  • Organization:
    Proskauer Rose LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Open Legal Blog Archive, Inc. logo
Seattle, Washington
Copyright © 2026, Open Legal Blog Archive, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo