Central Adjustment Bureau, Inc. v. Ingram
Tennessee Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DROWOTA, Justice.
This appeal under Rule 11, Tenn.R. App.P., involves non-competition clauses in employment contracts. It raises an issue regarding the consideration necessary to support such a covenant when it is entered into after employment has begun. In addition, the Court addresses the issue of whether a covenant not to compete, the geographic and time limitations of which are unnecessarily broad, can be judicially modified so as to make the covenant reasonable and enforceable.
I
The plaintiff-employer, Central Adjustment Bureau, a Texas corporation whose home office is in Dallas,…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Bob Pearsall Motors, Inc. v. Regal Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1975
- Raimonde v. Van VlerahOhio Supreme Court · 1975
- Karpinski v. IngrasciNew York Court of Appeals · 1971
- Sherman v. PfefferkornMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922
- Allright Auto Parks, Inc. v. BerryTennessee Supreme Court · 1966
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by65 opinions
- Armendariz v. Found. Health Psychcare Servs., Inc.California Supreme Court · 2000
- Tonya Cooper v. Mrm Investment Company, Terry Rogers and Larry MaysCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2004
- Airline Construction, Inc. v. BarrCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1990
- Alcazar v. HayesTennessee Supreme Court · 1998
- Vantage Technology, LLC v. CrossCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1999
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.