Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Central Indiana Podiatry v. Krueger

882 N.E.2d 723 (2008)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 31,100+ case briefs...

Central Indiana Podiatry v. Krueger

Indiana Supreme Court

882 N.E.2d 723 (2008)

Facts

A podiatrist, Kenneth Krueger (defendant) was employed by Central Indiana Podiatry (the practice) (plaintiff). Krueger entered into a series of noncompetition agreements with the practice that restricted Krueger’s competitive employment for two years after any termination. The noncompetition agreements provided that Krueger would be prohibited from practicing podiatry within 14 listed central Indiana counties, any other counties where the practice had an office, and any counties adjacent to these counties. Krueger worked at the practice’s offices in Marion, Tippecanoe, and Howard counties for two years prior to his termination for inappropriate conduct. Krueger obtained an electronic copy of his patients’ names and entered into an employment agreement with a group in Hamilton County, one of the counties listed in Krueger’s noncompetition agreement with the practice. Krueger provided a copy of the practice’s patient list to his new employer and sent a letter to the patients, announcing his new office located about 10 minutes from the practice’s office in northern Marion County. The practice filed suit, seeking injunctive relief against Krueger for violating the geographic limitations of the noncompetition agreement. The trial court ruled the noncompetition agreement was invalid, unenforceable, and unreasonable due to the geographic restriction. The practice appealed. The appeals court upheld as reasonable the geographic restriction of the noncompetition agreement, even though it covered a significant portion of Indiana. Krueger appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Boehm, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 557,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 557,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 31,100 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 557,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 31,100 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership