Firearms Training Systems, Inc. v. Sharp, A94A1351
Decision Date | 26 May 1994 |
Docket Number | No. A94A1351,A94A1351 |
Parties | , 1994-2 Trade Cases P 70,673 FIREARMS TRAINING SYSTEMS, INC. v. SHARP. |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Herbert P. Schlanger, Atlanta, for appellant.
Barry A. Karp, Atlanta, for appellee.
This direct appeal arises from the attempted enforcement of a restrictive covenant contained in a Property Rights, Non-Disclosure Agreement and Agreement Not to Compete executed by appellee Sharp while employed by the appellant, Firearms Training Systems, Inc., as the director of Firearms' law enforcement sales department. The trial court enjoined Firearms from enforcing the covenant.
Generally, the Supreme Court has exclusive appellate jurisdiction in matters of equity. Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Par. III. However, although the case presented involves injunctive relief, Pittman v. Harbin Clinic Professional Assn., 210 Ga.App. 767, 768, 437 S.E.2d 619 (1993). See also Hart v. Marion A. Allen, Inc., 211 Ga.App. 431, 440 S.E.2d 26 (1993); Smith v. HBT, Inc., 213 Ga.App. 560, 445 S.E.2d 315 (1994). 1
Firearms is a Delaware corporation in the business of manufacturing and distributing interactive video simulators used in training law enforcement and military personnel worldwide. On January 29, 1992, Sharp signed the agreement at issue. Paragraph 10 of the agreement provided that "[a]fter termination of [his] employment with [Firearms], [Sharp] w[ould] not, for a period of three years, directly or indirectly engage in competition with [Firearms]; that is, [Sharp] w[ould] not enter or engage in the business of developing or selling electronic firearms systems (whether intended for training purposes, amusement purpose or any purposes) in the capacity [Sharp] served during [his] relationship with [Firearms] (or any capacity) either individually, as a partner or joint venture, as an employee, or as an agent, officer, director, or shareholder of any entity or person." Sharp further agreed not to disclose any trade secrets that he obtained while working with Firearms. 2 The agreement also provided that Firearms' business activities and Sharp's sales responsibilities were worldwide, but Sharp testified that his sales activities were limited to the continental United States.
Sharp was terminated on May 12, 1993, and subsequently sought employment with Caswell International Corporation, a corporation involved in worldwide sales of interactive firearms training systems. However, Caswell refused to hire Sharp unless the covenant at issue was declared invalid or Firearms refused to enforce it. As a result, Sharp filed the instant action seeking a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief.
Firearms initially asserts that the trial court erred in concluding that the language contained in the covenant not to compete is overbroad, rendering the covenant unenforceable. The corporation further maintains that the restrictions contained therein are sufficiently narrow to support its validity. We disagree.
W.R....
To continue reading
Request your trial-
HULCHER SERVICES v. RJ CORMAN R. CO.
...from working for a competitor of the former employer in any capacity, such covenant is unreasonable. See Firearms Training Systems v. Sharp, 213 Ga.App. 566, 567, 445 S.E.2d 538 (1994); Fleury v. AFAB, Inc., 205 Ga.App. 642, 643, 423 S.E.2d 49 (1992). Such restriction imposes "a greater lim......
-
Capricorn Systems, Inc. v. Pednekar
...former employer, such covenant not to compete is unenforceable as being overly and unreasonably broad. Firearms Training Systems v. Sharp, 213 Ga.App. 566, 567, 445 S.E.2d 538 (1994); Fleury v. AFAB, Inc., 205 Ga.App. 642, 643, 423 S.E.2d 49 (1992). The former employer has no reasonable int......
-
Swartz Investments v. Vion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
...its appeal. 3. See, e.g., Lee v. Environmental Pest &c., 271 Ga. 371, 516 S.E.2d 76 (1999). 4. See, e.g., Firearms Training Systems v. Sharp, 213 Ga.App. 566, 445 S.E.2d 538 (1994). 5. See, e.g., Advance Technology Consultants v. RoadTrac, 250 Ga.App. 317, 551 S.E.2d 735 ...
-
Smith v. McClung, A94A1987
...superior court order McClung to deed certain real estate to Wade and Mary. Nevertheless, we recognized in Firearms Training System v. Sharp, 213 Ga.App. 566, 445 S.E.2d 538 (1994), that "[g]enerally, the Supreme Court has exclusive appellate jurisdiction in matters of equity. Ga. Const. of ......