John R. Ray & Sons, Inc. v. Stroman

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that because the covenant not to compete expired, “any reformation of that provision by the trial court would have been an exercise in futility.”
• holding that “Since the primary purpose of the Agreement was the covenant not to compete, it cannot be severed without adversely affecting the issuance of stock given in consideration therefor.”
• explaining that, in personal services occupations, “restraint[s] on client solicitation [are] overbroad and unreasonable when it extends to clients with whom the employee had no dealings during his employment”
• finding that reforming (e.g., shortening) the length of a non-competition covenant would be an exercise in futility because the time limit in the sought-to-be-reformed covenant expired before the district court entered judgment
• explaining covenant expired so “any reformation of that provision by the trial court would have been an exercise in futility.”
• determining reasonableness is a question of law

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).