American Speedreading Academy, Inc. v. Holst
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
KEITH, Justice.
Plaintiff below sought a temporary injunction to restrain the violation of an agreement not to compete. Upon the hearing, the trial court modified a temporary restraining order previously issued and refused to enter a broader order sought by plaintiff below and the appeal is from the denial of the complete relief sought.
Appellant, plaintiff below, according to its pleadings, “is in the business of selling, counseling, advising and soliciting accelerated learning, speed reading and related topics to the general public and owning, operating, managing, licensing and directing…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Transport Co. of Texas v. Robertson TransportsTexas Supreme Court · 1953
- Texas Foundaries, Inc. v. International Molders & Foundry Workers UnionTexas Supreme Court · 1952
- Sun Oil Company v. WhitakerTexas Supreme Court · 1968
- Weatherford Oil Tool Company v. CampbellTexas Supreme Court · 1960
- Janus Films, Inc. v. City of Fort WorthTexas Supreme Court · 1962
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- ELECTRONIC DATA SYSTEMS CORPORATION v. PowellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1974
- Gillen v. Diadrill, Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1981
- AMF TUBOSCOPE v. McBrydeCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1981
- Professional Beauty Products, Inc. v. DeringtonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1974
- Cross v. Chem-Air South, Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1983
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.