Central Adjustment Bureau, Inc. v. Ingram

See also Central Adjustment Bureau, Inc. v. Ingram

1984 Tennessee Supreme Court

• Earlier in course, we dealt with issue of whether there was consideration for covenant not to compete, for employees who had signed covenant after beginning employment. Now question is whether lower court was correct in revising covenant to reduced time period.
• Original covenant said employees could not take any client that had been client of firm ever, court revised agreement to include only clients that had been with firm at time employees left.
• Court also narrowed geographic scope of agreement (previously nationwide).
• Public interest: competition, efficiency of allowing people with skills to work in their industry.
• Court just enforces agreement to the degree it is ‘reasonable’–i.e., rewrites agreement as judge thinks would be reasonable.
• Alternative solution: ‘Blue pencil’ technique–simply eliminate unreasonable provisions. Very difficult to do within same clause of contract.

Author: international

Mentioned in these Entries

Central Adjustment Bureau, Inc. v. Ingram.