Ed Bertholet & Assocs. v. Stefanko - 690 N.E.2d 361

Rule:

Discretion to grant or deny an injunction is measured by several factors: (1) whether the plaintiff's remedies at law are inadequate, causing irreparable harm pending resolution of the substantive action; (2) whether the plaintiff has at least a reasonable likelihood of success at trial; (3) whether the plaintiff's threatened injury outweighs the potential harm to the defendant resulting from the granting of the injunction; and (4) whether the public interest will be disserved.

Facts:

Appellant employer and appellee employee entered into an agreement that included a covenant not to compete that provided for an injunction in the event of a breach of the covenant. The employee voluntarily left the employer's company and began working for a local competitor. Employer sought review of the judgment of the Laporte Superior Court (Indiana), which denied his petition for a preliminary injunction as to his employee.

Issue:

Did the trial court err by denying plaintiff’s petition for a preliminary injunction?

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

The court affirmed the trial court's denial of the employer's petition for a preliminary injunction. The employer failed to explain how the harm was irreparable. The employer failed to show that its remedies at law would be inadequate. The employment contract contained a liquidated damages provision that required the employee to pay the employer 15 percent of any bonds he wrote while in violation of the covenant not to compete. The court held that the agreement set an adequate monetary remedy in the liquidated damages provision.