Legal Opinion

Mann v. Cherry, Bekaert and Holland

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided April 16, 1982No. 80-666PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

This appeal comes to us from the Circuit Court for Jefferson County. The dispute between the parties involves the validity of a contract for the purchase and sale of an accounting practice. The contract contained a mutual non-competition covenant. Although the trial court held that the non-competition covenant was void under Code 1975, § 8-1-1, it, nevertheless, upheld the remainder of the contract, thereby requiring William C. Mann (defendant) to pay Cherry, Bekaert Holland (plaintiff) the agreed purchase price. From that judgment, the defendant appealed.

The dispositive issue on this appeal…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Storm v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  2. Town of Loxley v. ROSINTON WATER, SEWER, ETC.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1979
  3. Redwine v. JacksonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1950
  4. McIntyre Lumber & Export Co. v. Jackson Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1910
  5. Mass Appraisal Services, Inc. v. CarmichaelSupreme Court of Alabama · 1981

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Cherry, Bekaert & Holland v. BrownSupreme Court of Alabama · 1991
  2. Harris v. M & S TOYOTA, INC.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1991
  3. Pierce v. Hand, Arendall, Bedsole, Greaves & JohnstonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1996
  4. Anniston Urologic Associates v. KlineSupreme Court of Alabama · 1997
  5. Hurt v. GivenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1983

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API