We are blogging on “Non-competes, Trade Secrets, Fiduciary Duties, and the Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine.” Mark Oberti has prepared a detailed paper on all of these issues, which can be found here.
Generally, applications for injunctive relief are required to be verified, see TEX. R. CIV. P. 682; however, the verification requirement of rule 682 can be waived. Crystal Media, Inc. v. HCI Acquisition Corp., 773 S.W.2d 732, 734 (Tex. App. – San Antonio 1989, no writ); see Ex parte Stiles, 958 S.W.2d 414, 419 n. 2 (Tex. App. – Waco 1997, pet. denied). When a full evidentiary hearing on evidence has been held, a verified petition for injunctive relief is not required. Nguyen v. Intertex, Inc., 93 S.W.3d 288, 298 (Tex. App. – Houston [14th Dist.] 2002, no pet.), overruled, in part, on other grounds by Glassman v. Goodfriend, No. 14–09–00522–CV, 2011 Tex.App. LEXIS 4189, at *23, 2011 WL 2150225 (Tex. App. – Houston [14th Dist.] June 2, 2011, no pet.) (en banc); see Town of Palm Valley v. Johnson, 17 S.W.3d 281, 288 (Tex. App. – Corpus Christi 2000, pet. denied); Georgiades v. Di Ferrante, 871 S.W.2d 878, 882 (Tex. App. – Houston [14th Dist.] 1994, writ denied). “The reason for not requiring literal compliance with Rule 682 is that the writ of injunction is not granted upon the averments of the petition alone, but upon sworn and competent evidence admitted at a full hearing.” Nguyen, 93 S.W.3d at 298.