Millard v. Electronic Cable Specialists

How courts have described this case

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

• non-competition clause was reasonably necessary to protect former employer’s development of services and products with which the former employee had been closely associated
• “Courts infer irreparable harm upon the breach of a non-competition covenant where confidential information is involved.”
• court found little hardship likely to result from enjoining employee not to compete where employee had “demonstrated abilities” and experience in fields in his industry that did not compete with his former employer
• valid non-competition clauses do not violate public policy

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).