Vermont Supreme Court
523 A.2d 1228 (1987)
Dahlin (defendant) sold a successful restaurant to Fine Foods, Inc. (Fine Foods) (plaintiff). As part of the transfer, Dahlin signed a covenant not to compete. The covenant not to compete stated that, in consideration for $5,000, Dahlin agreed not to work in the restaurant business within a 25-mile radius of the restaurant being sold for a period of five years. Shortly after the sale, Dahlin began working as a maître d in a restaurant in the same town as his old restaurant. Fine Foods brought an action against Dahlin, seeking an injunction barring him from further violating the covenant. The trial court found that Dahlin had violated the covenant not to compete and granted the injunction. Dahlin appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Peck, J.)
What to do next…
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 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
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. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 222,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.