Oakdale Manufacturing Co. v. Garst
Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Bill in Equity for an injunction to restrain the defendant from carrying on business in violation of the following agreement: ‘ ‘And it is further mutually covenanted and agreed by and between the parties hereto, each for himself, however, and not for the others, that they will not engage, directly or indirectly, in any business of the same kind or for the same purpose or purposes, as that to be carried on by the corporation to be formed, nor will they, directly or…
Read the full summary
Bill in Equity for an injunction to restrain the defendant from carrying on business in violation of the following agreement: ‘ ‘And it is further mutually covenanted and agreed by and between the parties hereto, each for himself, however, and not for the others, that they will not engage, directly or indirectly, in any business of the same kind or for the same purpose or purposes, as that to be carried on by the corporation to be formed, nor will they, directly or indirectly, be concerned in, or be interested in, any firm, firms, corporation or corporations engaged in the same business or…
1Opinion of the CourtStiness, J.
The complainants seek an injunction against the respondent, to restrain him from violating his covenant that he would not engage or be concerned in, directly or indirectly, the manufacture or sale of butterine or oleomargarine, for the space of five years from the date of the covenant. Prior to April 30, 1891, the p.arties carried on that business separately, when they agreed to unite and form a corporation for the purpose of carrying on their business together. To this end, all the parties turned in the stock,'machinery, accounts and good will of their respective concerns, at a valuation…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- People v. North River Sugar Refining Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Arnot v. . Pittston and Elmira Coal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1877
- Tode v. . GrossNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Wiley v. BaumgardnerIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
- People v. North River Sugar Refining Co.New York Supreme Court · 1889
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Knight & Jillson Co. v. MillerIndiana Supreme Court · 1909
- Durapin, Inc. v. American Products, Inc.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1989
- Fisher Flouring Mills Co. v. SwansonWashington Supreme Court · 1913
- CVS Pharmacy, Inc. v. LavinCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2020
- Prame v. FerrellCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1909
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.