SANFORD INDUSTRIES, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
MOHAMMAD S. JAGHORY AND UNITED TRUSSED ROOFS CO., INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the trial court's denial of a preliminary injunction was proper because the non-competition agreement was unreasonable as to area.
Appellant sued a former employee for violating a non-competition agreement. The agreement prohibited the employee from engaging in a competing busines…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Breach Of Non-Compete Agreement cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant seeks reversal of an order denying its application for preliminary injunction and dismissing with prejudice its suit against a former employee under a non-competition agreement.
The business of the appellant was described as development, engineering, manufacturing and sales of trusses, machinery and equipment for both the construction and Mobilehome industries. The agreement called for the employee not to engage in a competing business or disclose or solicit its customers for one year after termination of employment for any reason, “in the area of the United States of America.” The complaint alleged termination of the employment by discharge of the employee, and that the latter was engaging in a competing business in violation of the contract.
The contract was of a kind valid and enforceable under § 542.12(2) unless unreasonable as to time or area. There was no question raised as to the time period, but the court denied plaintiff’s application for preliminary or temporary injunction upon holding the contract unreasonable as to area. Upon that ruling being made by the trial court the plaintiff elected not to proceed further and requested entry of final judgment; which latter fact was revealed in the judgment, as follows: “And the plaintiff having requested that a final order be entered without further amendments or proofs.”
Therefore, the matter before us is not a decision reached on final hearing, but a question of the propriety of the order of the trial court denying the plaintiff’s application for preliminary injunction.
On consideration of the record we find no sufficient reason to disturb the ruling *78of the trial court which was predicated on its finding and conclusion that the agreement was not limited to . a “reasonable area” as provided for in the enabling statute. See Davis v. Ebsco Industries, Inc., Fla.App.1963, 150 So.2d 460.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Auto Club Affiliates, Inc. v. Donahey, 281 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973)…v. Hudson Cush-N-Foam Corp., Fla.App.3d 1960, 122 So. 2d 232. It should be noted however that Fountain involved a temporary injunction until its reasonableness could be determined on the facts. Sanford Industries, Inc. v. Jaghory, Fla.App.3d 1969, 223 So. 2d 77, and C & D Farms, Inc. v. Cerniglia, Fla.App.3d 1966, 189 So. 2d 384, involve cases where covenants not to compete have not been enforced because the time and area limitations were determined to be unreasonable under the circumstances. The business…
-
Dorminy v. Frank B. Hall & Co., Inc., 464 So. 2d 154 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)…They also managed one automobile and general liability insurance fund for one customer; and they acted as reinsurance brokers in some instances. Their primary customers were located in Florida and Alabama. . See Sanford Industries, Inc. v. Jaghory, 223 So. 2d 77 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1969). . Miller Mechanical, Inc. v. Ruth, 300 So. 2d 11 (Fla.1974); Flammer v. Patton, 245 So. 2d 854 (Fla.1971). . See Sentry Insurance v. Dunn, 411 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Availability, Inc. v. Riley, 336 So. 2d 668 (Fla. 2…
Authorities Cited
- Pier Pavilion, Inc. v. Hensley, 150 So. 2d 460 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)
- Shepard W. Davis v. Ebsco Indus., Inc., 150 So. 2d 460 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)