Carpenter & Hughes v. De Joseph
| Decision Date | 16 November 1961 |
| Citation | 10 N.Y.2d 925,224 N.Y.S.2d 9,179 N.E.2d 854 |
| Parties | , 179 N.E.2d 854 CARPENTER & HUGHES, Appellant, v. Henry DE JOSEPH Respondent. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, 13 A.D.2d 611, 213 N.Y.S.2d 860.
The defendant contracted with the plaintiffs that he would not engage in the ophthalmic dispensing business within the City of Syracuse, New York, or solicit the business of any customers of plaintiffs, or disclose the identity of any such customers or any information concerning the business or affairs of the plaintiffs for a period of five years following termination of his employment with the plaintiffs. After working for the plaintiffs for about 13 years, the defendant left the plaintiffs' employ and proceeded to engage in the ophthalmic dispensing business in the City of Syracuse. The plaintiffs brought an action for specific performance.
The Supreme Court, Regular and Special Term, Onondaga County, Bert B. Lockwood, J., 27 Misc.2d 1003, 213 N.Y.S.2d 856, held that the contract provision prohibiting the defendant from engaging in the ophthalmic dispensing business within the city for five years was against public policy and unenforceable, where there were no trade secrets connected with the plaintiffs' business, and the defendant's services were neither unique nor extraordinary, and where it appeared that, as a practical matter, anyone engaged in the ophthalmic dispensing business would be required to rely principally on referrals from eye doctors. It was held however that the defendant should be restrained from soliciting for himself or anyone else in the business the plaintiffs' customers and from disclosing to anyone the identity, or any other information resulting to ophthalmic dispensing, of any such customers, other than from the medical profession. Both the plaintiffs and the defendant appealed.
The Appellate Division, 13 A.D.2d 611, 213 N.Y.S.2d 860, modified the judgment and affirmed it as modified and held that the Special Term correctly determined that the defendant should be restrained from soliciting the business of plaintiffs' customers and revealing their identity or disclosing any other information relating to ophthalmic dispensing of such customers, other than from the medical profession, but that the granting of any further restraint would be more extensive than required by the legitimate interests of the plaintiffs.
The plaintiffs appealed to the Court of Appeals,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Solari Industries, Inc. v. Malady
...Co. v. Alt, 271 N.Y. 76, 2 N.E.2d 51 (1936); Carpenter & Hughes v. De Joseph, 13 A.D.2d 611, 213 N.Y.S.2d 860, aff'd, 10 N.Y.2d 925, 224 N.Y.S.2d 9, 179 N.E.2d 854 (1961); Cf. Purchasing Associates, Inc. v. Weitz, 13 N.Y.2d 267, 246 N.Y.S.2d 600, 196 N.E.2d 245 (1963)), New Jersey's public ......
-
John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Austin
...F. Smith Aff.) This rises to the level of "confidential customer information" under Reed. Id.; see Carpenter & Hughes v. De Joseph, 10 N.Y.2d 925, 926, 224 N.Y.S.2d 9, 179 N.E.2d 854 (1961); Lepel High Frequency Lab., Inc. v. Capita, 278 N.Y. 661, 16 N.E.2d 392 (1938). Therefore, the second......
-
Purchasing Associates, Inc. v. Weitz
...or his solicitation of, or disclosure of any information concerning, the other's customers. (See, e. g., Carpenter & Hughes v. De Joseph, 10 N.Y.2d 925, 224 N.Y.S.2d 9, 179 N.E.2d 854, affg. 13 A.D.2d 611, 213 N.Y.S.2d 860; Clark Paper & Mfg. Co. v. Stenacher, 236 N.Y. 312, 318, 140 N.E. 70......
-
Greenwich Mills Co., Inc. v. Barrie House Coffee Co., Inc.
...& Hughes v. De Joseph, 27 Misc.2d 1003, 213 N.Y.S.2d 856, mod. on other grounds 13 A.D.2d 611, 213 N.Y.S.2d 860, affd. 10 N.Y.2d 925, 224 N.Y.S.2d 9, 179 N.E.2d 854; there, a covenant restricting defendant from engaging in the ophthalmic dispensing business for five years was stricken in th......