Windshield Installation Network v. Goudreau

2 Citing cases

  1. Morris v. Schroder Capital

    2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 8638 (N.Y. 2006)   Cited 94 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Stating that the general disfavor of noncompete provisions doesn't apply when an employer conditions receipt of postemployment benefits upon compliance with a restrictive covenant

    " Frank H. Wright Associates, P.C., New York City ( Frank H. Wright and Robert M. Sanchez of counsel), for appellant. I. The correct standard for involuntary termination in employee choice cases is "continued willingness to employ" in the same or a comparable job. ( American Broadcasting Cos. v. Wolf, 52 NY2d 394; BDO Seidman v. Hirshberg, 93 NY2d 382; Wolff v. Wolff, 67 NY2d 638; Matter of Long Is. Gastrointestinal Disease Group [Good — Dolgin], 251 AD2d 330; Columbia Ribbon Carbon Mfg. Co. v. A-1-A Corp., 42 NY2d 496; Last v. New York Inst, of Tech., NY Coll. of Osteopathic Medicine, 219 AD2d 620; Genesis II Hair Replacement Studio v. Vallar, 251 AD2d 1082; Ken J. Pezrow Corp. v. Seifert, 197 AD2d 856, 83 NY2d 798; Windshield Installation Network v. Goudreau, 237 AD2d 694; Ticor Tit. Ins. Co. v. Cohen, 173 F3d 63.) II. The constructive discharge test of objectively intolerable working conditions is not the correct test for involuntary termination under the employee choice doctrine. ( International Bus. Machs. Corp. v. Martson, 37 F Supp 2d 613; Halbrook v. Reichhold Chems., Inc., 735 F Supp 121; Best v. Peninsula N.Y. Hotel Mgt., 309 AD2d 524; Fischer v. KPMG Peat Marwick, 195 AD2d 222; Granser v. Box Tree S., 164 Misc 2d 191.)

  2. Nigra v. Young Broadcasting

    177 Misc. 2d 664 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1998)   Cited 1 times

    Turning to the likelihood of plaintiff succeeding on the merits of her claim, once the term of an employment agreement has expired, the general public policy favoring robust and uninhibited competition should not give way merely because an employer wishes to insulate itself from competition from a former employee ( American Broadcasting Cos. v. Wolf, 52 N.Y.2d 394, 404). It is well established that restrictive covenants that tend to prevent an employee from pursuing a similar vocation after termination of employment are not favored by the law ( Columbia Ribbon Carbon Mfg. Co. v. A-1-A Corp., 42 N.Y.2d 496, 499; Windshield Installation Network v. Goudreau, 237 A.D.2d 694, 695). Anticompetitive employment agreements, therefore, are enforced only to the extent necessary to protect the employer from unfair competition that stems from the employee's use or disclosure of trade secrets or confidential customer lists or where the employee's services are unique ( Windshield Installation Network v. Goudreau, supra).