Suess signed a contract which included a covenant not to compete with his old employer for a year.When Suess quit,he went into competition with his former employer and was sued.He argued that the covenant was not valid.The court held:
A)Suess was right,all such covenants are void
B)in all states,such covenants violate public policy
C)such covenant are unconscionable in all states
D)the covenant is probably valid in states that allow them
E)the covenant was not backed up by consideration,so there was no contract to be violated

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The most likely scenario is that the covenant not to compete would be considered valid in states where they are allowed, as long as it is reasonable in scope and duration, and backed up by consideration (such as continued employment or additional compensation). Option A, B, and C are too extreme and unfounded as it depends on the state laws and circumstances surrounding the case. Option E is also not a correct answer as the existence of consideration is a factual determination that needs to be made by the court.

Suess Signed a Contract Which Included a Covenant Not to Compete