In Zambelli Fireworks Manufacturing Co. v. Wood, where Zambelli sued Wood for violating the noncompete agreement in his contract, the appeals court held that:
A) the noncompete agreement was void because it violated common law policies
B) the noncompete agreement was void because it violated public policy
C) Wood's specialized knowledge from working at Zambelli, but not customer goodwill, constituted a legitimate business interest that Zambelli had a right to protect through a reasonable restrictive covenant
D) Wood's specialized knowledge from working at Zambelli in addition to customer goodwill constituted legitimate business interests that Zambelli had a right to protect through a reasonable restrictive covenant
E) Wood's specialized knowledge from working at Zambelli and established customer goodwill did not constitute legitimate business interests that Zambelli had a right to protect through a reasonable restrictive covenant
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q207: A(n) _ is one in which employees
Q208: In Zambelli Fireworks Manufacturing Co. v. Wood,
Q209: A noncompete agreement is one in which:
A)
Q210: An exculpatory agreement is one in which:
A)
Q211: Employees may be required to sign, as
Q213: Employees may be required to sign, as
Q214: A(n) _ is one in which one
Q215: A(n) _ is one in which employees
Q216: Employees may be required to sign, as
Q217: Employees may be required to sign, as
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents