Legal Opinion

Albert E. Cinelli v. American Home Products Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided February 24, 1986No. 84-1626PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JOHN P. MOORE, Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment holding that a forfeiture clause in a contract of employment which became operative upon plaintiff’s subsequent employment by defendant’s competitor did not constitute an unreasonable restraint of trade under the Sherman Act. The court also held that defendant’s postemployment revocation of awards to plaintiff did not result in a breach of this contract. We believe the trial court’s analysis was correct, and we affirm.

Plaintiff Albert E. Cinelli was hired by American Home Products (AH) in 1967 to work in the latter’s legal…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. The Rochester Corporation v. W. L. Rochester, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1971
  2. Partick Edwin Golden, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross v. Kentile Floors, Inc., Defendants-Appellants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1975
  3. Henry A. Gehrhardt v. General Motors CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1978
  4. Richard D. Austin v. The House of Vision, Inc., a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1969

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Norton Sarnoff and Carl Fletcher, and v. American Home Products Corporation, Defendant-Appellant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1986
  2. Durapin, Inc. v. American Products, Inc.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1989
  3. Michael Tatom v. Ameritech Corporation and Ameritech Information Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2002
  4. Thomas W. Freeze v. American Home Products CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1988
  5. Faw, Casson & Co. v. EverngamCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1992

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API