Essay about Business Law Case

935 Words Mar 28th, 2013 4 Pages
Neurology Associates LLP. vs Elizabeth Blackwell, MD

An Assignment Submitted by

Name of Establishment

Class XXXX, Section XXXX, Fall 2011

Case: Neurology Associates LLP, vs Elizabeth Blackwell, MD

Overview of Facts

In May 2005, Dr. Elizabeth Blackwell earned her Medical Doctor Degree and she was hired by the Neurology Associates LLP, located in Longville state in June 2005. She has been offered different jobs before, but Dr. Elizabeth concluded by choosing Neurology Associates LLP because of the interval between her home and family. The employment agreement, signed by Dr.Elizabeth, included detailed clauses of compensation terms, vacation, on all duties and fringe benefit package. NA agreed to pay $1,000 for the course
…show more content…
Moreover, he claimed that he needs to have the documents ready by the end of the day in order to process Dr. Blackwell’s payroll check, and she was unwilling to sign the document.
But in August 2009, the partners met disagreements with Blackwell because she was spending too much hours on working than partners did. Partners refused any negotiations with Blackwell and she was called “a workhorse” by one of the partners. NA hired a new physician to help Blackwell to manage the practice. In January 2010, even after taking her board certification, Blackwell felt more isolated from the other physicians. On March 1, 2010 Blackwell announced that she was leaving NA in 60 days to join Galway Hospital in the city of Galway. She was expecting to start her career at Galway on June, 2010, because she was offered to be one of the founding physicians of in the group that was being formed in Galway Hospital. Cohn accepted her letter by reminding her about the restrictive covenant and non-compete clause. Primary issue of law
The primary issue of law in this case is whether the actions of NA and noncompete clause in the Addendum to Employment Agreement between partners and Blackwell demonstrate a legitimate interest and whether the clause may be unenforceable.
Summary of arguments: Plaintiff
The restrictive covenant must be enforced, because the Neurological Associates have the legal right to protect its business interests. NA made a reasonable

Related Documents