Advanced Marine Enterprises, Inc. v. PRC Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that plaintiff could simultaneously receive statutory treble damages and punitive damages in tort for the same “underlying” conduct, so long as the two categories of damages “were based on separate claims involving different legal duties and injuries”
• upholding clause because it did not place a blanket prohibition on working for a competitor, but only from rendering services to the former employer’s customers
• allowing conspiracy claim predicated on tortious interference, before Station #2, in a case involving “outrageous” conduct such as theft of corporate files by breaching employees
• upholding a restriction limited to a fifty-mile radius around former employer's 300 offices
• enforcing a restrictive covenant that barred the employee from “rendering competing services to ... or soliciting any customer ... for whom Employee performed services while employed by PRC, within 50 miles of a PRC office”
• finding legal malice where, among other facts, “individuals in the business conspiracy participated in a scheme to take the entire marine engineering department from [the plaintiff] and relocate the department at [the defendant]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).