Court Opinion

ID: 9780459
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 01:58:05.780292+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:34:05.028698
License: Public Domain

MURRAY, J.,
concurring with reasons.
hThe issue in this case is whether the three non-solicitation agreements at issue are legally valid. If the agreements are invalid, then the trial court correctly denied the request for a preliminary injunction. The agreements contain both non-competition and non-solicitation provisions; thus, the agreements to be valid were required to contain separate lists of the restricted parishes and municipalities for non-competition and for non-solicitation purposes. Although the agreements contain geographical restrictions for competition, the agreements lack such restrictions for solicitation. Accordingly, the trial court correctly found the agreements in*1222valid and denied the request for injunctive relief.