SEABURY & SMITH, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff, vs. PAYNE FINANCIAL GROUP, INC., a Montana corporation, EDWARD EUGENIO, and D. GERARD BULGER, Defendants., 393 F. Supp. 2d 1057

Summary

The court found that the terms "solicit", "service" and "direct or indirect" in the restricting covenants were not ambiguous. It was well-settled law in the state of Washington that a restrictive covenant could prohibit the performance or providing of services and solicitation. The covenants were limited in duration to the relatively short time period of one-year, and the covenants were also reasonably limited in scope to plaintiff's clients and prospective clients who were solicited or serviced during employee's term of service with plaintiff. However, although the court found that the non-compete covenants were reasonable, enforceable, and unambiguous, it further found that genuine issues of material fact remained as to whether defendants breached their respective covenants. Because plaintiff could not establish its right to summary judgment on the tortious interference claim without first establishing that defendants breached the restrictive covenants, plaintiff's motion for summary...