Emily was a Java programmer employed with Sun Microsystems in Palo Alto, California. Upon beginning employment
Emily was a Java programmer employed with Sun Microsystems in Palo Alto, California. Upon beginning employment, Emily signed a contract that included a noncompete clause that, within three months of terminating her employment, prevented her from taking another Java programming position with any of five companies Sun listed as “direct competitors.” Later that year, Emily resigned and two months later accepted a position with Hewlett-Packard (HP) in Houston, Texas. HP was listed in Emily’s contract as a “direct competitor,” but she argues that due to the significant geographic distance between both jobs, the contract is not enforceable. Explain whether the contract is enforceable.
The two probable solutions for the case are as follows:
Judgment in favor of Individual E:
The incomplete agreement between Individual E and Company S does not mention the geographical distance, which is covered by the agreement.
As the job in the company is geographically far for Individual E, the agreement is not enforceable. The reason for the agreement and the way it affects Company H is also not clearly mentioned.
Judgment in favor of Company S:
The clauses of the incomplete agreement were clearly explained to Individual E at the time of signing and the consideration provided is the employment opportunity.
The contract clearly mentions a period of three months and also the names of the competitors but Individual E has taken a job with a competitor mentioned in the contract and within the time period mentioned. This proves a breach of contract by Individual E.