Question

ABC Corp. hired Wolfgang to fill the position of an accountant. ABC is in the recycling business and operates only in New York City. Wolfgang signed an employment contract that contained a non-compete provision. This provision states that Wolfgang will not work for another recycling company for six years anywhere in the State of New York. After five years Wolfgang quit and accepted a position with a recycling company in Buffalo N.Y., four hundred miles away from N.Y. City. ABC is suing Wolfgang to enforce the non-compete agreement. The likely outcome of this lawsuit is:

a. Wolfgang will win, because this non-compete agreement is not reasonable.

b. Wolfgang will win, because non-compete agreements that are part of employment contracts are never enforced.

c. Wolfgang will lose, because this non-compete agreement is reasonable.

d. Wolfgang will lose, because public policy requires the general enforceability of non-compete agreements.

Answer 1

a. Wolfgang will win, because this non-compete agreement is not reasonable.

Step-by-step explanation:

A non-compete provision refers to clauses that prohibit or restrict the possibility that the employee will be re-employed in similar enterprises, within a certain radius or for a certain time, either in function identical to that occupied in the previous job or in another in which the acquired knowledge. may be used in whole or in part for the new functions. In the case shown in the above question, the non-compete provision imposed by ABC corp. Wolfgang demanded that Wolfgang not work for any recycling company in the New York state. This agreement is unreasonable as it covers a very large area. For this reason, Wolfgang will win the process. With this we can state that the correct answer to your question is the letter A.