Glazer Steel Corp. v. Espenan

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Glazer Steel Corp. v. Espenan

306 So. 2d 78, 1974 La. App. LEXIS 3130

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedDecember 10, 1974

DocketNo. 6438

StatusPublished

This text of 306 So. 2d 78 (Glazer Steel Corp. v. Espenan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Glazer Steel Corp. v. Espenan, 306 So. 2d 78, 1974 La. App. LEXIS 3130 (La. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

REDMANN, Judge.

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment refusing to enjoin its former employee (a steel salesman) from working for a competitor. The employment contract had contained a no-competition clause. We affirm.

In support of its position that training and advertising expenditures (including entertainment of and Christmas gifts to customers) brings its contract within the exception of La.R.S. 23:921, plaintiff cites this court’s National School Studios, Inc. v. Barrios, La.App.1970, 236 So.2d 309, and similar cases from other circuits. The cases plaintiff cites are expressly overruled by Orkin Exterminating Co. v. Foti, La.1974, 302 So.2d 593. There are no extraordinary training or advertising expenses in our case which remove it from governance by Foti.

The judgment is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

REDMANN, Judge.

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment refusing to enjoin its former employee (a steel salesman) from working for a competitor. The employment contract had contained a no-competition clause. We affirm.

In support of its position that training and advertising expenditures (including entertainment of and Christmas gifts to customers) brings its contract within the exception of La.R.S. 23:921, plaintiff cites this court’s National School Studios, Inc. v. Barrios, La.App.1970, 236 So.2d 309, and similar cases from other circuits. The cases plaintiff cites are expressly overruled by Orkin Exterminating Co. v. Foti, La.1974, 302 So.2d 593. There are no extraordinary training or advertising expenses in our case which remove it from governance by Foti.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

306 So. 2d 78, 1974 La. App. LEXIS 3130, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/glazer-steel-corp-v-espenan-lactapp-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack