DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Martin-Parry Corp. v. New Orleans Fire Detection Service, 60 So. 2d 83.

22 citing documents.

  • CDI CORP. v. Hough 9 So. 3d 282 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    (1952), the court in John Jay Esthetic Salon, Inc. noted that “[a]n agreement not to engage in competition with the employer is vastly different from an agreement not to solicit the employer’s customers or employees or to engage in a business relationship with the employees or contractors.” John Jay Esth
  • Allied Bruce Terminix Co. v. Guillory 649 So. 2d 652 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
  • Matter of Arbitration Between Standard Coffee Service Co. and Preis 499 So. 2d 1314 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1986
    The non-solicitation agreement is valid and enforceable in accordance with the decision of the Louisiana Supreme Court in the case of Martin-Parry Corporation vs. New Orleans Fire Detection Service, et al, [ ]
  • Pitts v. Gulf South Divers, Inc. 387 So. 2d 65 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1980
    * * * ” We can find no merit, however, in Treadway’s argument that the note he signed indebting Gulf South Divers, Inc., contained a potestative condition, , (1952): “A potestative condition is stated by Article 2024 of the LSA-C.C.
  • John Jay Esthetic Salon, Inc. v. Woods 377 So. 2d 1363 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1979
  • Inabnet v. Pan American Life Insurance Co. 267 So. 2d 774 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
    Dorsey v. State Farm Insurance Company, *777 294 F.2d 678 (5th Cir. 1961) , (1952); Wright v. Southwestern Life Insurance Company, No. 14562 (U.S.D.Ct., W.D.La., August, 1972).
  • Lanier v. Trans-World Life Insurance 258 So. 2d 103 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
    Texaco, Inc. v. Vermilion Parish School Board, supra; , (1952); Gordon v. Unity Life Ins.
  • McCray v. Cole 251 So. 2d 161 La. 1971
    (1952), the contract restraint under consideration provided that the employee would, among other things, at the termination of the contract, refrain from using the employer's trade name and that he would not, * * * prior to the termination hereof, or for a period of two (2) years after the termination he
  • McCray v. Blackburn 236 So. 2d 859 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1970
  • McCray v. Cole 236 So. 2d 863 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1970
    In upholding the provision for liquidated damages in the Adams case, the Court stated at , 744: " , , the Supreme Court of this State made these observations we deem particularly appropriate to the issues herein involved: "Article 1901 of the LSA-C.C.
  • World Wide Health Studios, Inc. v. Desmond 222 So. 2d 517 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1969
    "In Martin-Parry Corp. v. New Orleans Fire Detection Service, supra [ , ], the Supreme Court reexamined the reasoning in Blanchard v. Haber, 166 La.
  • Bookkeepers Business Service, Inc. v. Davis 208 So. 2d 1 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
  • Wilson v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co. 194 So. 2d 739 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
    Cagle Supply of Lafayette, Inc. v. Hinson, La.App., ; Martin-Parry Corp. v. New *742 Orleans Fire Detection Service, , ; Mente & Co. v. Roane Sugars, Inc., 199 La.
  • Delta Finance Company of Louisiana v. Graves 180 So. 2d 85 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1965
    Although counsel for defendants have attacked this agreement made between Delta and Graves as wanting in consideration and as being potestative these contentions are without merit, , (1952).
  • National Motor Club of Louisiana, Inc. v. Conque 173 So. 2d 238 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1965
  • Aetna Finance Company v. Adams 170 So. 2d 740 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
    the Supreme Court of this State made these observations we deem particularly appropriate to the issues herein involved: "Article 1901 of the LSA-C.C.
  • Cagle Supply of Lafayette, Inc. v. Hinson 155 So. 2d 773 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1963
    Art. 1901; , ; Mente & Co. v. Roane Sugars, 199 La.
  • Long v. Foster & Associates, Inc. 136 So. 2d 48 La. 1961
    The same implication is found in the opinions of Judge Foster in Cali v. National Linen Service Corporation, 5 Cir., 38 F.2d 35 , , .
  • Long v. Foster & Associates, Inc. 129 So. 2d 601 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
    The same implication is found in the opinions of Judge Foster in Cali v. National Linen Service Corporation, 5 Cir., 38 F.2d 35 , , .
  • Sewell v. Sharp 102 So. 2d 259 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1958
  • Baton Rouge Cigarette Service v. Bloomenstiel 88 So. 2d 742 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1956
    The public policy of the state, as expressed in said statute, , decided by this Court, , .
  • Francois v. Alexius 82 So. 2d 113 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1955
    And they, having thus refused to go further with the option, cannot now complain that defendant might have refused to go on.” , , the Supreme Court, speaking through Justice McCaleb, in dealing with an alleged potestative condition stated: “Accordingly, as long as' the object of the contract is lawful, it is the duty of the court to enforce it as written.