Mosimann v. Employers Cas. Co., 13914
| Decision Date | 08 February 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 13914,13914 |
| Parties | Albert Theodore MOSIMANN, Jr., Appellant, v. EMPLOYERS CASUALTY COMPANY, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Wayne Carter, Houston, for appellant.
Ben G. Sewell, Atty., Houston, McGregor, Sewell & Junell, Houston, of counsel, for appellee.
This is an appeal from a judgment temporarily enjoining appellant from selling certain kinds of insurance in Harris County, Texas.
Appellant entered into an employment contract with appellee by the terms of which he agreed to '* * * refrain from soliciting for * * * himself or any other insurer * * * any class of insurance business in which the companies shall be engaged, within * * * any district * * * to which salesman was * * * assigned * * *' for a period of two years from the date of the termination of his employment.
After working for appellee for approximately six years in Harris County, appellant resigned and began selling insurance of a class competitive with that offered by appellee. Appellant testified at the trial that he would continue to sell such insurance unless he should be restrained from doing so.
Appellant urges that the temporary injunction should be dissolved because appellee failed to show that the provisions of the contract restricting appellant's right to work were reasonably necessary for the protection of appellee's business. He further contends that the contract violates public policy in that it imposes an unreasonable and unnecessary restraint on competition and that it imposed on appellant a greater restraint than was reasonably necessary for the protection of appellee's business and good will.
Since this is an appeal from an order granting a temporary injunction, the judgment of the trial court cannot be disturbed on appeal unless the record shows that the trial court has abused his discretion by granting the injunction. Miller v. Texsteam Corp., Tex.Civ.App., 327 S.W.2d 465.
The evidence is undisputed that the parties agreed on the provision of the contract made the basis of the suit and that appellant had violated this provision of the contract, and threatened to do so in the future unless restrained. The evidence was sufficient to support an implied finding of the trial court that irreparable injury would result to appellee unless the threatened action was enjoined. The evidence fails to disclose an abuse of discretion.
This Court has previously held, in McAnally v. Person, Tex.Civ.App., ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Arrow Chemical Corp. v. Pugh, 17978
...of the covenant not to compete. McAnally v. Person, 57 S.W.2d 945 (Tex.Civ.App., Galveston 1933, writ ref'd); and Mosimann v. Employers Casualty Co., 354 S.W.2d 171 (Tex.Civ.App., Houston 1962, no writ). In the present case appellee Pugh, who seeks to avoid the effect of the agreement, file......
-
James S. Kemper & Co. Southeast, Inc. v. Cox & Associates, Inc.
...Implement and Hardware Insurance Co. v. Anderson, 49 Tenn.App. 124, 351 S.W.2d 411 (Tenn.Ct.App.1961); Mosimann v. Employers Casualty Company, 354 S.W.2d 171 (Tex.Civ.App.1962). The circuit court took an erroneous view of the clear language of the covenant and the law as applied to the fact......
-
Toch v. Eric Schuster Corp.
...of the covenant. McAnally v. Person, 57 S.W.2d 945 (Tex.Civ.App., Galveston 1933, writ ref'd); and Mosimann v. Employers Casualty Co., 354 S.W.2d 171 (Tex.Civ.App., Houston 1962). Practically all of the cases dealing with the question of enforcement of covenants not to compete relate to agr......
-
Fidelity Union Life Ins. Co. v. Protective Life Ins. Co.
... ... year within 75 mile radius of Houston, Texas, held reasonable); Mosimann v. Employers Cas. Co., 354 S. W.2d 171 (Tex.Civ.App.—Houston 1962, no ... ...