Legal Opinion

Finger v. Hahn

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided February 15, 1887PublishedCited by 2 opinions

The defendant covenanted with complainant, who bought his retail butcher business, “ not to carry on the retail butcher business on his own account, or operate any butcher business except a wholesale butcher business, within the corporate limits of the city of Newark” during a period not yet expired.

Read the full summary

The defendant covenanted with complainant, who bought his retail butcher business, “ not to carry on the retail butcher business on his own account, or operate any butcher business except a wholesale butcher business, within the corporate limits of the city of Newark” during a period not yet expired. He afterward engaged in the retail grocery business, and then sold it to a third party, who employed defendant to take charge of the retail butcher business in connection with the grocery. Defendant did so, buying all the meats &c., and thereby injured complainant’s trade considerably. — Held,…

1Opinion of the Court

BIRD, Y. C.

The complainant, Finger, purchased the butcher business of the defendant, Hahn, in which he was engaged in the city of Newark. Hahn entered into a covenant, in these words :

“ Does hereby covenant to and with the party of the second part * * * that he will not carry on the retail butcher business on his own account, or operate any butcher business, except a wholesale butcher business, within the corporate limits of the city of Newark ” —

during a period not yet expired. Soon thereafter Hahn commenced the grocery business. This proving a failure, he desired to sell it, to do which he…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Voices, Inc. v. Metal Tone Mfg. Co., Inc.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1936
  2. Schwartz v. Van Der Plate Co., Inc.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1942

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

Powered by the Exa API