Burnet v. Ryle

• Decision Date: 22 May 1893
• Citation: 17 S.E. 986,91 Ga. 701
• Parties: BURNET. v. RYLE et al.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

17 S.E. 986

91 Ga. 701

BURNET.

v.RYLE et al.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

May 22, 1893.

Contract for Personal Services—Injunction.

Unless personal services are individual and peculiar because of their special merit or unique character, a negative covenant (even when express) not to render them to others than the plaintiff will not be enforced by injunction in order that the plaintiff may have the incidental benefit of an affirmative covenant to serve him exclusively lor a specified time. Hence, where one assigned to a firm his interest in a certain contract of agency for an insurance company, and in the assignment covenanted to remain with the firm as special agent in a named state for one year, and to give his entire time and attention to the business of that company by procuring for it applications for insurance, an injunction will not be granted at the instance of the firm to restrain the assignor from soliciting insurance or transacting business for a rival company, the assignment containing no express covenant that he would not do so, and it not appearing that he was a specially skillful, successful, or expert insurance agent whose place could not be readily supplied by another equally competent to attend to the business for which his services had been engaged.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Error from superior court, Fulton county; M. J. Clarke, Judge.

Action by D. M. Ryle & Co. to enjoin Julius A. Burney from working for another. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant brings error. Reversed.

Hines, Shubrick & Felder, for plaintiff in error.

Arnold & Arnold, for defendants in error.

LUMPKIN, J. The plaintiff in error, under a contract with one Crawford, the manager of the Massachusetts Benefit Association, an insurance company, had certain rights to transact business in the state of Georgia as the agent of that association. By a written contract he sold and assigned to the defendants in error all his right, title, and interest in and to the contract with Crawford above mentioned. The assignment also contained the following covenant: "I hereby bind myself to remain with the said firm of D. M. Ryle & Co., as special agent in the state of Georgia, for one year from this date, and to give my entire time and attention to the business of the Mass. Benefit Association by procuring applications for insurance for said company, and such other duties as may be agreed upon by us." Ryle & Co. filed an equitable petition, alleging that Burney had violated his contract with them, and was continuing to do so, by wholly abandoning his duties as solicitor for the Massachusetts company, and had begun business on his own account for the Connecticut Indemnity Association, which was an insurance company of a similar kind, and a rival in business. They prayed, among other things, that he be enjoined from further breaking the contract by continuing to represent the Connecticut company, and from soliciting or writing risks in the state of Georgia for any other than the Massachusetts company during the year covered by his contract with them. An injunction was granted forbidding the...