Alston Studios, Inc. v. Lloyd V. Gress & Associates’s Empirical Analysis
492 F.2d 279 · 1974
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 1 district · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2018 · most notably Snepp v. United States (1980), Microstrategy Incorporated v. Business Objects Sa (2005)
10 federal appellate · 1 district · 15 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Erie Co v. Tompkins · Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co. · Worrie v. Christine · Richardson v. Paxton Company · Meissel v. Finley
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) Is the restraint, from the standpoint of the employer, reasonable in the sense that it is no greater than is necessary to protect the employer in some legitimate business interests?; (2) From the standpoint of the employee, is the restraint reasonable in the sense that it is not unduly harsh and oppressive in curtailing his legitimate efforts to earn a livelihood?; (3). Is the restraint reasonable from the standpoint of a sound public policy?”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[B]ecause of its limitless geographic application ..., we hold the provision unenforceable and void.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“`employer has the burden of proving that the restraint is reasonable and the contract is valid. Since the restraint sought to be imposed restricts the employee in the exercise of a gainful occupation, it is a restraint of trade and it is carefully examined and strictly construed before the covenant will be enforced. Moreover, the scope of permissible restraint is more limited between employer and employee than between seller and buyer, and the covenant is construed favorably to the employee.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Pemco Corp. v. Rose
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.