Arthur Murray Dance Studios of Cleveland, Inc. v. Witter
Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
By HOOVER, J.
When the defendant, Clifford Witter, a dance instructor, waltzed out of the employment of the plaintiff, the Arthur Murray Dance Studios of Cleveland, Inc., into the employment of the Fred Astaire Dancing Studios, the plaintiff waltzed Witter into court. For brevity, the two studios are called “Arthur Murray” and “Fred Astaire.” At the time Witter took his contentious step, Arthur Murray had a string attached to him— a certain contract prohibiting Witter, after-working for Arthur Murray no more, from working for a competitor. That Arthur Murray and Fred Astaire are rivals…
2Cases cited46 opinions
- Kadis v. . BrittSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
- Clark Paper & Manufacturing Co. v. StenacherNew York Court of Appeals · 1923
- Sherman v. PfefferkornMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922
- Kaumagraph Co. v. . Stampagraph Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1923
- Orkin Ex. Co. Inc., So. Georgia v. DewberrySupreme Court of Georgia · 1949
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by113 opinions
- Morgan's Home Equipment Corp. v. MartucciSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
- Krawiec v. ManlySupreme Court of North Carolina · 2018
- Raimonde v. Van VlerahOhio Supreme Court · 1975
- Bennett v. Storz Broadcasting Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1965
- Donahue v. Permacel Tape Corp.Indiana Supreme Court · 1955
108 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.