Legal Opinion
Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. v. Werthman
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided February 7, 2001PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion denied and first through eighth causes of action reinstated. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting defendants’ motion to dismiss *935the first through eighth causes of action of the amended complaint (see, CPLR 3211 [a] [1], [7]). The restrictive covenants set forth in the employment agreement are client-based, and the court erred in determining that they are unreasonable as a matter of law because they contain no geographic limitations (see, Bates Chevrolet Corp. v Haven Chevrolet, 13 AD2d 27, 30). In any event, overbroad…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- BDO Seidman v. HirshbergNew York Court of Appeals · 1999
- Bates Chevrolet Corp. v. Haven Chevrolet, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1961
- Trans-Continental Credit & Collection Corp. v. FotiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
3Cited by6 opinions
- Scott, Stackrow & Co., C.P.A.'S, P.C. v. SkavinaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- NATSOURCE LLC v. ParibelloDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2001
- GENESEE VALLEY TRUST COMPANY v. THE WATERFORD GROUP, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- Genesee Valley Trust Co. v. Waterford Group, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- Genesee Valley Trust Co. v. Waterford Group, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.