- 18 - period of 3 years. We find that these limits were reasonably drawn to keep them from competing with State Supply. g. Enforceability Under State Law The buyers were told by their attorney that the covenants would be virtually nonenforceable in equity and that their only recourse would be to obtain a refund of the moneys paid for the covenants. Respondent admits on brief that State law provided such a remedy. h. Age and Health of Grantors Respondent concedes that Holliday and Beaurline had no apparent health problems. Their age is not in the record. i. Whether Payments Were Pro Rata to the Grantors' Stock Ownership Although Holliday owned approximately 50 percent more stock than Beaurline, she received the same amount under the noncompete agreements as Beaurline. These non-pro rata payments indicate that something other than stock was purchased. j. Whether Payments Cease Upon Breach or Upon the Death of a Grantor The noncompete agreements called for payments to be made into escrow in the event of the grantors' breach. However, the payments were to be continued upon the death of a grantor. This factor supports respondent. k. Active Negotiations Over Terms and Value There were active negotiations over the terms of the covenants; the term was lowered from 5 to 3 years. The value ofPage: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011