Key Power Technical Institute v. CDL School, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Key Power Technical Institute v. CDL School, Inc.

807 So. 2d 707, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 435, 2002 WL 80698

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 23, 2002

DocketNos. 3D01-1035, 3D01-1002

StatusPublished

This text of 807 So. 2d 707 (Key Power Technical Institute v. CDL School, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Key Power Technical Institute v. CDL School, Inc., 807 So. 2d 707, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 435, 2002 WL 80698 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The record lacks sufficient evidence to establish a legitimate business interest (including one which is unique enough) so as to justify entering an injunction to enforce the non-competition agreement. In addition, as to the corporate defendant/appellant, even if the record contained a basis that would support the entering of an injunction, the injunction is overbroad to the extent that it prohibits the corporation from hiring anyone who has worked for the plaintiff/appellee.

Furthermore, totally aside from the foregoing problems with the injunction, the trial court was in error when it ruled that it would not allow the individual appellant to introduce evidence that the appellee had breached the employment contract by fail[708]*708ing to pay the individual appellant his salary.

Lastly, in view of the foregoing, we address the issue concerning the amount of bond only to the extent that we find that the amount posted is clearly insufficient.

Reversed and remanded.

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

PER CURIAM.

The record lacks sufficient evidence to establish a legitimate business interest (including one which is unique enough) so as to justify entering an injunction to enforce the non-competition agreement. In addition, as to the corporate defendant/appellant, even if the record contained a basis that would support the entering of an injunction, the injunction is overbroad to the extent that it prohibits the corporation from hiring anyone who has worked for the plaintiff/appellee.

Furthermore, totally aside from the foregoing problems with the injunction, the trial court was in error when it ruled that it would not allow the individual appellant to introduce evidence that the appellee had breached the employment contract by fail[708]*708ing to pay the individual appellant his salary.

Lastly, in view of the foregoing, we address the issue concerning the amount of bond only to the extent that we find that the amount posted is clearly insufficient.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

807 So. 2d 707, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 435, 2002 WL 80698, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/key-power-technical-institute-v-cdl-school-inc-fladistctapp-2002.