Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In 1922, the Supreme Judicial Court eliminated any doubt that restrictive covenants in the employment context would be enforced when reasonable. [50] The basic proposition enunciated long ago continued to apply in the 2000s: "A covenant not to compete is enforceable only if it is necessary to protect a legitimate business interest, reasonably ...
In contract law, a non-compete clause (often NCC), restrictive covenant, or covenant not to compete (CNC), is a clause under which one party (usually an employee) agrees not to enter into or start a similar profession or trade in competition against another party (usually the employer).
Non-solicitation agreement provisions—alongside the non-compete clause (NCC) and the non-disclosure agreement (NDA)—constitute one of three restrictive covenants frequently found within a business contract. They may be entered into with both employees and independent contractors—in addition to multiple entities—as part of a larger ...
In real estate, a restrictive covenant is a rule or condition placed on a property that outlines what homeowners can and cannot do with their land. These covenants are legally binding and often ...
Davidson Bros., Inc. v. D. Katz & Sons, Inc., 643 A.2d 642 (App. Div. 1994), was a case decided by the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey that first applied public policy considerations instead of the touch and concern doctrine when deciding the validity of a restrictive covenant.
Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment required the government to demonstrate both a compelling interest and that the law in question was narrowly tailored before it denied unemployment compensation to someone who was fired because her job requirements substantially conflicted ...
At common law, the benefit of a restrictive covenant runs with the land if three conditions are met: [14] The covenant must not be personal in nature – it must benefit the land rather than an individual; The covenant must 'touch and concern' the land – it must affect how the land is used or the value of the land
The Commission's policy with respect to restrictive covenants is clearly stated in the MO&O establishing a limited preemption of state and local regulations. In the MO&O, the Commission stated that PRB-1 does not reach restrictive covenants in private contractual agreements.