Rooyakker & Sitz, PLLC v. Plante & Moran, PLLC

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that a clause that prohibited former employees from soliciting or providing services to the employer’s clients for a two-year period, without any geographical limits, was reasonable
• concluding that an order sending the case to arbitration was a final order because the court did not retain jurisdiction to enforce the award or enter judgment on the award
• holding a two-year restriction on soliciting clients by accountants who left an accounting firm was reasonable
• discussing a trial court’s retention of jurisdiction as a consideration when determining whether an order is “final” for purposes of MCR 7.202(6)(a)(i)
• requiring arbitration of plaintiffs “dispute or controversy arising out of or relating to” his past employment even though defendants were not named in the arbitration contract
• rejecting plaintiffs claim that defendants did everything to undermine the success of plaintiffs office while at the same time representing to plaintiff that the office would remain open

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).