Bindagraphics, Inc. v. Fox Grp., Inc.
District Court, D. Maryland
1Opinion of the Court
In Medispec, Ltd. v. Chouinard , the covenant in question prevented the employee from working "in an [sic ] capacity whatsoever, directly or indirectly" with a competitor. 133 F.Supp.3d at 772. The court found that the prohibition was facially overbroad because it "prevents Defendant from taking any, job, no matter how unrelated to his prior sales work, with a company that indirectly competes" with the plaintiff and was "not reasonably targeted to achieve the Plaintiff's stated interest in protecting *573goodwill." Id. at 775. In Seneca One Finance, Inc. v. Bloshuk , albeit a case involving a…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Trandes Corporation v. Guy F. Atkinson Company, and Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1993
- Cheek v. United Healthcare of the Mid-Atlantic, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2003
- MacKlin v. Robert Logan AssociatesCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1994
- Blondell v. LittlepageCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2010
- Fowler v. Printers II, Inc.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1991
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Bourne v. CVSDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2022
- Carriage Hill Management, LLC v. Austin Hartley, et al.District Court, D. Maryland · 2026
- FTI Consulting, Inc. v. OrszagDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2024
- Houserman v. Comtech Telecommunications CorporationDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2021
- MuniCap, Inc v. WilsonDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2024
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.