 We do not see how a better test can be applied to the question whether reasonable or not, than by considering whether the restraint is such only as to afford a fair protection to the interests of the party in favor of whom it is given, and not so large...  The New-York Legal Observer - Side 172redigert av - 1846Uten tilgangsbegrensning - Om denne boken
 | New Jersey. Court of Chancery - 1887 - 812 sider
...this : to consider whether the restraint is such only as to afford a fair protection to the interest of the party in favor of whom it is given, and not so large as to interfere with the interest of the public. Whatever restraint is larger than the necessary protection of the party can... | |
 | New Jersey. Court of Chancery - 1892 - 734 sider
...order to be valid, must be only such as is necessary to afford a fair protection to the party in ftvor of whom it is given, and not so large as to interfere with the interest of the public. This is the principle which controlled the decision in Mandeville v. Harman,... | |
 | New Jersey. Court of Chancery - 1893 - 690 sider
...is only such as is necessary to afford a fair protection to the interest of the party in whose favor it is given, and not so large as to interfere with the interest of the public." Brewer v. Marshall, 4 CE Or. 587. See, also, reference to other cases to same... | |
 | Great Britain. Court of Common Pleas, Peregrine Bingham - 1831 - 850 sider
...whether the restraint is such only as to afford a fair protection to the interests of the party in favour of whom it is given, and not so large as to interfere...can only be oppressive; and if oppressive, it is, in the eye of the law, unreasonable. Whatever is injurious to the interests of the public is void, on... | |
 | Great Britain. Court of Common Pleas, John Bayly Moore, Joseph Payne - 1832 - 874 sider
...whether the restraint is such only as to afford a fair protection to the interests of the party in favour of whom it is given, and not so large as to interfere...protection of the party can be of no benefit to either; it 1831. can only be oppressive; and, if oppressive, it is in the eye of the law unreasonable. Whatever... | |
 | Samuel Bealey Harrison, Great Britain. Court of King's Bench, Frederick Luard Wollaston - 1837 - 520 sider
...whether the restraint is such only as to afford a fair protection to the interests of the party in favour of whom it is given, and not so large as to interfere...only be oppressive ; and if oppressive, it is, in the eye of the law, unreasonable. Whatever is injurious to the interest of the public is void, on the... | |
 | Great Britain. Court of King's Bench - 1837 - 886 sider
...whether the restraint is such only as to afford a fair protection to the interests of the party in favour of whom it is given, and not so large as to interfere...can only be oppressive; and if oppressive, it is in the eye of the law unreasonable. Whatever is injurious to the interests of the public, is void on the... | |
 | Great Britain. Court of Exchequer, Roger Meeson, William Newland Welsby - 1837 - 988 sider
...whether the restraint is such only as to afford & fair protection to the interests of the party in favour of whom it is given, and not so large as to interfere with the interests of the public. No certain precise boundary can be laid down, within which the restraint would be reasonable, and bevond... | |
 | Francis Stack Murphy, Edwin Tyrrell Hurlstone, Great Britain. Court of Exchequer - 1838 - 416 sider
...whether the restraint is such only as to afford a fair protection to the interests of the party in favour of whom it is given, and not so large as to interfere...can only be oppressive, and if oppressive, it is, in the eye of the law, unreasonable. Whatever is injurious to the interests of the public is void on the... | |
 | Great Britain. Court of King's Bench, John Leycester Adolphus, Thomas Flower Ellis - 1838 - 1096 sider
...favour of whom it is given, and again* Col.IV.. not so .large as to interfere with the interests or the public. Whatever restraint is larger than the...only be oppressive ; and if oppressive, it is, in the eye of the law, unreasonable. Whatever is injurious to the interests of the public is void, on... | |
| |
