Thompson

Thompson v. Impaxx, Inc.

Good Law
113 Cal. App. 4th 1425·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 1813·2003 Daily Journal DAR 13261·7 Cal. Rptr. 3d 427·20 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 1195
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 8, 2003No. B164006California2,268 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Armstrong, J.

This is a wrongful termination case which presents a single issue concerning covenants not to compete. The case comes to us after the defendants’ 1 motion for judgment on the pleadings was granted. Thus, on this appeal, we deem true all material facts which were properly pleaded and determine whether the complaint states a cause of action. (Mack v. State Bar of California (2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 957 [ 112 Cal.Rptr.2d 341 ].) Applying those rules, we reverse.

The facts set forth in the complaint are simple: appellant Daniel Thompson worked for a company called Pac-West Labels. In September of 2000, Impaxx, Inc. bought Pac-West and asked appellant to sign a covenant which read “For a period of one (1) year following the termination of employment, I will not (1) call on, solicit, or take away any of Pac-West Label’s customers or potential customers with whom I have had any dealings as a result of my employment by Pac-West Label.” Appellant refused, and was fired for that reason. He sued for wrongful termination under the rule that termination of an employee for refusal to sign an unenforceable covenant not to compete is a wrongful termination in violation of public policy.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.