Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 20 NOVEMBER 2012

Star Direct And Noncompetes: Interpreting Restrictive Covenants

Wisconsin's lower courts continue to work out the implications of the Wisconsin Supreme Court's 2009 decision in Star Direct v. Dal Pra (previously discussed here).

United StatesEmployment and HR

Wisconsin's lower courts continue to work out the implications of the Wisconsin Supreme Court's 2009 decision in Star Direct v. Dal Pra (previously discussed here). Among other things, Star Direct clarified that although restrictive covenants should be viewed with disfavor, courts should not read them unreasonably. Rather, courts must interpret the covenant just as they would interpret any other contract.

In Key Railroad v. Guido et al., the plaintiff sought to enforce its restrictive covenant that prohibited the defendants from soliciting or accepting any competing business from a "client" of their former employer with whom the defendants had contact during their employment. The defendants argued that the covenants were unenforceable because they did not define the term "client."

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from