- 21 -
that the facts favoring petitioner outweigh the facts upon which
respondent relies.
4. Mary Walker's Covenant Not To Compete
We believe Mary Walker lacked the technical expertise needed
to compete with petitioner. She had done office work in the
forest products industry for many years, but she had not bid for
timber, sold products, or supervised operations. Petitioner's
expert, Paul Clausen (Clausen) of Business Valuation Research,
Inc., of Portland, Oregon, testified that Mary Walker did not
contribute much to the Walker entities. There is no convincing
evidence that Mary Walker's competition would damage petitioner,
or that she had the kind of business relationships with suppliers
and customers that would enable her to compete with petitioner.
There is no credible evidence that petitioner had a genuine
interest in eliminating Mary Walker as a competitor. In 1988,
Mary Walker was no longer doing much with the Walker entities.
She did not say that she wanted to compete. There is no
convincing evidence that she intended to compete. These factors
favor respondent.
Petitioner relies on the facts that in 1988, Mary Walker
was 65 and in good health, had financial resources, and had a
covenant that was limited to 5 years and to a 140-mile radius
around Lyons, Oregon. We think these limits would have
reasonably kept Mary Walker from competing with petitioner.
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011