Court Opinion

ID: 9517652
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 00:25:55.432168+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:05:54.452797
License: Public Domain

NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, concurring:
I concur in the opinion for the court and write separately only to note that the district court’s conclusion that the non-compete clause was unreasonable was dependent on the court’s finding that McGough was not a “field representative.” Because of that finding, the non-compete clause had a geographical scope covering the entire nation. As we point out, however, this fact could only have been determined preliminarily in the context of whether to grant a preliminary injunction. Any ultimate finding on that point, whether by the court or by the jury, could be different and therefore could result in a much reduced geographical application of the non-compete clause. In that circumstance, a different analysis under West Virginia law would be required.