Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Nevada opinions name it 1 courts 1878–2016 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Nevada courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Data Management, Inc. v. Greenegreen2 sentences2016The modification test has been adopted by "most United States jurisdictions." Data Mgmt., Inc. v. Greene, 757 P.2d 62, 64 (Alaska 1988) (adopting the approach that allows a court to reasonably alter a non-compete agreement so long as the agreement was drafted in good faith). 2016The modification test has been adopted by "most United States jurisdictions." Data Mgmt., Inc. v. Greene, 757 P.2d 62, 64 (Alaska 1988) (adopting the approach that allows a court to reasonably alter a non-compete agreement so long as the agreement was drafted in good faith). | 5 | 5 |
Hilligoss v. Cargill, Inc.green2 sentences2016See, e.g., Hilligoss v. Cargill, Inc., 649 N.W.2d 142 , 147 n.8 (Minn. 2002) (explaining that "a court at its discretion [can] modify unreasonable restrictions on competition in employment agreements by enforcing them to the extent reasonable"); Whelan Sec. 2016See, e.g., Hilligoss v. Cargill, Inc., 649 N.W.2d 142, 147 n.8 (Minn. 2002) (explaining that "a court at its discretion [can] modify unreasonable restrictions on competition in employment agreements by enforcing them to the extent reasonable"); Whelan Sec. | 5 | 5 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Nevada. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Bourne v. Ashley
neutral
1 sentence1878(Boylan v. Huguet, supra; Weymouth v. Chicago and Northwestern Railway Company, 17 Wis. 554 ; Moody v. Whitney, 38 Me. 174 ; Bourne v. Ashley, 1 Lowell, 27 ; Winchester v. Craig, 33 Mich. 207 .) There may be cases imagined that might require a modification of this rule, in order to reach the controlling principle of compensation; for it has been often said that the rule always yields, when the facts require it, to the principle upon which the rule is founded. ' But “sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof,” and it will be time enough to decide such cases when they are presented. | 1 | 1878–1878 |
Moody v. Whitney
neutral
1 sentence1878(Boylan v. Huguet, supra; Weymouth v. Chicago and Northwestern Railway Company, 17 Wis. 554 ; Moody v. Whitney, 38 Me. 174 ; Bourne v. Ashley, 1 Lowell, 27 ; Winchester v. Craig, 33 Mich. 207 .) There may be cases imagined that might require a modification of this rule, in order to reach the controlling principle of compensation; for it has been often said that the rule always yields, when the facts require it, to the principle upon which the rule is founded. ' But “sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof,” and it will be time enough to decide such cases when they are presented. | 1 | 1878–1878 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.