Grasselli v. Lowden
Ohio Superior Court, Cincinnati
General Term. — Proceeding in error to reverse a judgment of the special term, rendered in favor of Lowden for $3,000. The action was founded on an agreement in writing between Lowden and Grasselli. Certain averments are made in the petition showing the position of the parties before and at the time the agreement was made. Grasselli had erected, and was conducting, on premises owned by him, a chemical laboratory.
Read the full summary
General Term. — Proceeding in error to reverse a judgment of the special term, rendered in favor of Lowden for $3,000. The action was founded on an agreement in writing between Lowden and Grasselli. Certain averments are made in the petition showing the position of the parties before and at the time the agreement was made. Grasselli had erected, and was conducting, on premises owned by him, a chemical laboratory. Lowden was the owner and occupier of premises in the vicinity; and, claiming that the business carried on by Grasselli was a nuisance, brought an action, which action, he alleges,…
1Opinion of the CourtGholson, J.
A question has been made, which it is proper first to examine, whether, upon his statement, Lowden can maintain an action? The objection made is, that the contract is in restraint of trade; and, though the restraint is partial, such circumstances are not shown as the rule of law, in cases of this description, requires to make the contract valid.
*325In considering contracts for the restraint of trade, there are two matters which should be kept distinct: first, the interest of the parties contracting for a restraint of trade; second, the nature and extent of the restraint. As to the first point, I…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Union Bank of Georgetown v. GearySupreme Court of the United States · 1831
- Barrow v. RichardNew York Court of Chancery · 1840
- McKinley v. WatkinsIllinois Supreme Court · 1851
- Wood v. McCannCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1838
- Sherman v. BarnardNew York Supreme Court · 1855