Jewel Tea Co. v. Novak

131 N.W. 415, 146 Wis. 224, 1911 Wisc. LEXIS 127
Wisconsin Supreme Court·Decided May 2, 1911·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

ViNje, J.

This case is ruled by the case of Eureka L. Co. v. Long, ante, p. 205, 131 N. W. 415. The in junctional order dissolved should be modified,-however, by striking out the last clause thereof, to wit, “or from engaging for himself, or any other person or company, in the tea and coffee business in the city of Milwaukee.” It will be observed from the statement of facts that this covenant in the contract was to be in force only during the life of the contract, while the other covenants set out were to be in force for twelve months thereafter. When defendant left the employ of plaintiff oh or about the 31st [226] day of August, 1910, the contract terminated as to the covenant mentioned.

The order is affirmed so far as it relates to the clause in the injunctional order that reads, “or from engaging for himself, or any other person or company, in the tea and coffee business in the city of Milwaukee.” As to the remainder, it is reversed with costs to the appellant.

By the Gourt. — It is so ordered.

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

Jewel Tea Co. v. Novak, 131 N.W. 415, 146 Wis. 224, 1911 Wisc. LEXIS 127 (Wis. 1911).

131 N.W. 415 (Jewel Tea Co. v. Novak) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Love v. Miami Laundry Co.
160 So. 32 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1934)
Lichtenstein v. Silverman
30 Ohio C.C. Dec. 66 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1914)