Hopper v

Hopper v - HELD Yes Judgement affirmed in part(3 to 1 year...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Hopper v. All Pet Animal Clinic Sup Ct of Wyoming (1993) J. Taylor p. 436 FACTS: P worked at D animal clinic and signed a covenant not to compete within a 5-mile radius for a period of 3 years. When P quit and opened a competing practice nearby, D sued for an injunction and for damages. Trial ct granted injunction but said damages were speculative. Both parties appealed. ISSUE: Whether a covenant not to compete can be enforced as long as it does not create an unreasonable restraint of trade.
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: HELD: Yes. Judgement affirmed in part (3 to 1 year) RULE: Under the Rule of Reason approach to covenants not to compete, an employer has the burden to prove that (1) the covenant is in writing (2)it is part of the employment contract (3)it is based on reasonable consideration and (4)it is not in violation of public policy. (1) was in writing (2) was part of contract (3) got a raise for signing (4) not in violation...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online