People v. Lobell

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that a restrictive covenant is enforceable to the extent necessary to prevent an employee’s “solicitation of, or disclosure of any information concerning, [the former employer’s] customers”
• “since there are powerful considerations of public policy which militate against sanctioning the loss of a man’s livelihood, the courts have generally displayed a much stricter standard with respect to covenants of this type”
• “Also enforceable is a covenant given by an employee that he will not compete with his employer when he quits his employ, and the general limitation of ‘reasonableness’ ... applies equally to such a covenant.”
• “Since there are powerful considerations of public policy which militate against sanctioning the loss of a man's livelihood, the courts have generally displayed a much stricter attitude with respect to covenants of this type.”
• A restrictive covenant will be enforced only to the “extent necessary to prevent the employee’s use or disclosure of his former employer’s trade secrets, processes or formulae or his solicitation of, or disclosure of any information concerning the other’s customers.”
• defining a non-compete as “an agreement in restraint of trade”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).