PULSE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. NOTARO

No. 6 MAP 2012

67 A.3d 778 (2013)

PULSE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Appellant v. Peter NOTARO and MK Precision LLC, Appellees.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Decided May 29, 2013.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Adam Gregg Silverstein , Clair E. Wischusen , Fox Rothschild, LLP, Warrington, for Appellant.

Christopher Edward Ezold , Robert Harrison Graff , The Ezold Law Firm, P.C., Bala Cynwyd, for Appellee.

BEFORE: CASTILLE, C.J., SAYLOR, EAKIN, BAER, TODD, McCAFFERY, ORIE MELVIN, JJ.


OPINION

Justice EAKIN.

We granted allocatur to determine whether the Superior Court erred by declining to validate a restrictive covenant contained in an employment agreement, solely because the restrictive covenant was not expressly referenced in an initial offer letter which conditioned employment on the execution of the employment agreement. Upon concluding the Superior Court did not properly characterize the offer letter, we vacate and remand...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases