Russell Daniel Irrigation Co. v. Coram

How courts have described this case

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

• “This covenant is unenforceable because it purports to prevent [the defendant] from obtaining employment with any competitor in any capacity.”
• “[T]he limited partnership agreement had its own restrictive covenant in addition to the restrictive covenant contained in the employment agreement, which subjects the latter covenant to strict scrutiny.”
• even when employee became part owner “as a result of the transaction,” covenant should receive strict scrutiny because he had “the bargaining power of only a mere employee at the time he negotiated the transaction”
• “Strict scrutiny applies to covenants ancillary to employment agreements, whereas a much lesser degree of scrutiny applies to covenants ancillary to the sale of a business; a middle level of scrutiny applies to covenants found in professional partnership agreements.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).