New Britain herald., 1926-02-03
SAYS EX.EMPLOYES
 MAY SOLICIT TRADE
Judge filling Files Finding
 Against Laundry Corp.
FOR WITKIN AND REYNOLDS
Court UphoIds Right of Discharged Workmcn To Seek Business In Own Behalf And Sets Aside Tenn porary Injunction.

Own Behalf And Sets Aside Tenn
 porary Injunction.
 The right of Charles Witkin and Frank Reynolds, two discharged employees of the Union Laundry Co.,, to engage in the laundry business in this city is upheld in a decision fil- cd in city court today by Judge E. w. filling, the effect of which is to dissolve a temporary injunction granted several weeks ago to re- strain Witkin and Reynolds from such practice.
 Hearing on the petition to dissolve the temporary injunction was held in city court two weeks ago, Attor- ney Francis P. Rorhmayer of Hart ford appearing as counsel for the two applicants. Through Judge John H. Kirkham, the laundry company sought to have the temporary order stand. A complete review of the i evidence was had at that time. l COntractS Signed Late
 The two former employees admit ted having signed contracts under which they agreed not to engage i'll laundry work for two years after leaving the company's employ. It was brought out that the contracts were not signed until some months after Witkin and Key. holds entered the defendants en- ploy, that the same contract speci. fled commission payment on new work brought in, which, however, was never paid, and that both men were discharged from the company's employ.
 Ossian S. Bennett, president of the company, admitted the con- tracts were signed after the period of employment had begun and that both were discharged. He said no commissions were paid by agree
 mcnt with the two Torkmen.
 Witkin and Reynolds admitted they had been in the laundry busi-
 ness after leaving the c6mpany's
 employ and said their intention
 was to continue if permitted.
 In his finding, Judge Allina
 points to the facts thal the men
 were employed some time prior tC signing contracts, and it is not con ; Slusively shown that the custom. : ers solicited were not persons who's , 4,-, J- hpfnra n f contracts. The contract prohibits : tle soliciting of persons who's, trade was brought to the defendant
 company during the period of th' ) contract.
 "Tho phrase within two year after leaving their service is inter preted to mean within two year , after a voluntary leaving and tn > fact that they were discharge 7 throws another light on the sub l icct, it Is pointed out.
 3 There is still pending in tn = courts an application for per 2 manont injunction and counsel 10 s the laundry company declared to 3 day tho city court action will in n l way affect the prosecution of thi a complaint.
 Judge filings Finding
 Judge filings finding follows: . "The defendant in this actio 0 had been in the employ Of th r plaintiff for q considerable perio | of time and had necessarily durin c the course O. this employment of Q tained certain information with rel
 eraDce to the conduct Of the bus t ness of the plaintiff. The plainti q then. for the purpose of preVcntln S him from taking advantage of tn
 information and knowledge Whic # may be said to have been acquire d because Of his confidential relation |. with his employer. entered into 1T Il agreement which agreement is fl i the sole benefit and protection
 the plaintiff in this action. TT L. language used in this agreement + the language of the plaintiff in 'hi n the agreement was one prepare 'e by the plaintiff and submitted le the defendant for his siguatur
 The plaintiff now complains th ,r the defendant whom he admitted re discharged is using certain info c. nation which he obtained while
 the employ of the paint if In su'
 q way that he is doing irreparah
 damage to the plaintiff and th
 therefore the extraordinary reme,
 of an injunction to prevent il :" defendant from dong what he a I'm parently Is doing. that is, solicitil
 customers who were customers
 the plaintiff during his period S- fTnnt;nund on Papp Sl