Kansas Court of Appeals
69 P.3d 194 (2003)
William Cirocco, M.D. (defendant), a colorectal surgeon, entered into an employment contract with Bruce D. Graham, M.D., P.A. (plaintiff), who was also a colorectal surgeon. The employment contract contained a non-competition covenant stating that, for a period of two years after leaving Graham’s employment, Cirocco (1) would not, within 150 miles of any of Graham’s offices, solicit business from Graham’s patients or referral sources with whom Cirocco came into contact as Graham’s employee; and (2) would not open a practice within 25 miles of the hospitals listed in the contract or provide services at those hospitals. Cirocco resigned from Graham’s employment in 2000 and opened an office for the practice of colorectal surgery next door to Graham. Graham sued to enjoin Cirocco from having this office and soliciting patients. Cirocco argued that the covenant was unenforceable as against public policy because the covenant (1) suppressed ordinary competition by protecting Graham’s interest in patient and referrals and (2) would deprive northeastern Kansas of much-needed colorectal surgeons. At trial, evidence was presented that Graham’s practice remained completely full, such that there was a three to four week wait time for an appointment; Graham had to remain on call 24 hours a day and seven days a week; and Graham was considering employing another surgeon. Evidence was also presented that the enforcement of the covenant would leave northeastern Kansas with one colorectal surgeon for 700,000 potential patients, which would underserve the region, and that colorectal surgeries performed by general surgeons resulted in higher death rates than those performed by colorectal surgeons. Nevertheless, the trial court concluded that the covenant was reasonable and enforceable, and enjoined Cirocco’s practice for two years. Cirocco appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Beier, 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 221,000 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.