Unformatted text preview: the time he joined the firm. One of the clauses in
the contract stated that if Hefty ceased working for Toothrot, he could not work as a salesman for
a competing company anywhere in Indiana for a period of five years. Hefty left his employment
with Toothrot and promptly went to work as a salesman for a candy company that competed with
Toothrot. His duties with the new employer were confined to the town of Elkhart, which is
located in northern Indiana. Toothrot has sued Hefty in an effort to obtain an injunction against
further violation of the non-competition clause in the parties’ employment contract. Which of
the following is most true?
Toothrot will win, because the clause’s geographic scope was restricted to the state in which
Toothrot does business.
Toothrot will win, because the time period of the clause was reasonable.
Both a and b are true.
Hefty will win, because the area of the restriction is not reasonable.
339. Normally, an illegal contract:
View Full Document
This test prep was uploaded on 03/29/2014 for the course BUL 3130 taught by Professor Schupp during the Fall '12 term at UNF.
- Fall '12
- The Lottery