Wilson v. Center Bros., Inc.
| Decision Date | 28 October 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 38960,38960 |
| Citation | 296 S.E.2d 589,250 Ga. 156 |
| Parties | , 1982-83 Trade Cases P 65,008 Miles M. WILSON v. CENTER BROTHERS, INC., et al. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Laura L. Manor, Smyrna, for Miles M. Wilson.
Tony Center, Atlanta, for Center Bros., Inc.
Center Brothers, Inc., is a subcontracting construction company engaged in selling and installing general floor covering, acoustical ceilings, and wall partitions. Center Brothers hired Miles M. Wilson to serve as general manager of its Atlanta office. 1 In 1969 Wilson and Center Brothers entered into an employment contract which provided, in relevant part: "Employee [Wilson] agrees and covenants that he will not, for a period of one year after the termination of his employment with the corporation, regardless of the reason for such termination, engage directly or indirectly, personally or as an employee, associate, partner, manager, or otherwise or by any means of any corporate or legal device, in the business of selling and processing floors, ceilings, partitions and related trades within the City of Atlanta and within a radius of 100 miles of the City Hall of Atlanta, Georgia."
This contract was still in force when Wilson voluntarily left his position with Center Brothers on August 7, 1981. On August 14, 1981, Wilson formed Wilson Interiors, Inc., becoming its sole stockholder. Wilson Interiors performs work similar to that done by Center Brothers, on a smaller scale.
On November 17, 1981, Center Brothers filed suit seeking (1) to enjoin Wilson from violating the contract; (2) to recover damages for breach of the contract; (3) to recover damages for tortious interference with business relationships of Center Brothers; and (4) to recover damages for divulging trade secrets of Center Brothers. Following a hearing on the claim for injunctive relief, at which the parties agreed that if the contract was enforceable then an injunction would be warranted, the court issued an order finding the contract valid, binding and enforceable and enjoining Wilson from participating in any activity that would violate the contract until its expiration on August 7, 1982. Wilson appealed. During the pendency of the appeal the injunction expired. Because the validity vel non of the restrictive covenant is controlling as to the pending damage claim for breach of contract, we proceed to address that issue even though the injunction has expired and any error regarding its issuance is...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Zant v. Nelson
-
Moore v. Preferred Research, Inc., 77867
...sought to protect). Contrary to plaintiffs' assertions, the language now before us is not analogous to that in Wilson v. Center Bros., 250 Ga. 156, 296 S.E.2d 589 (1982), wherein a covenant which prohibited the employee from engaging in a specified business "and related trades" was found to......
-
Roberts v. Tifton Medical Clinic, P.C.
...forbidden to engage. See Fields v. Rainbow Intl. Carpet Dyeing, etc., Co., 259 Ga. 375, 380 S.E.2d 693 (1989); Wilson v. Center Bros., 250 Ga. 156, 157, 296 S.E.2d 589 (1982); Howard Schultz, supra, 239 Ga. at 184(2), 236 S.E.2d 265. But see National Teen-Ager Co. v. Scarborough, 254 Ga. 46......
-
Orkin Exterminating Co. v. Walker
...fails to specify with particularity the activities which the appellees are proscribed from performing. Wilson v. Center Brothers, Inc, 250 Ga. 156, 296 S.E.2d 589 (1982); Howard Schultz v. Broniec, 239 Ga. 181, 185, 236 S.E.2d 265 Because a judgment which is right for any reason will be aff......
-
Noncompete Clauses in Georgia: an Economic Analysis
...See Kohn, supra note 2, at 664-65. 103. Howard Schultz & Assocs. v. Broniec, 236 S.E.2d 265, 268 (Ga. 1997); Wilson v. Ctr. Bros., Inc., 296 S.E.2d 589, 590 (Ga. 1982); Dixie Bearings, Inc. v. Walker, 133 S.E.2d 338, 341 (Ga. 1963); Kohn, supra note 2, at 664. 104. Howard Schultz & Assocs.,......