major customers and prospects. Lieto clearly had access to customer lists, pipeline reports, and customer trip reports. As Vice-President of Sales and Service, Lieto obviously worked on promoting Cereva’s product and fostered good will with potential customers. Cereva is justified in protecting this established good will as a legitimate business interest. A non-competition agreement, to be enforceable, also must be reasonable in geographical scope and length of time. See Blackwell v. E.M. Helides, Jr., Inc., 368 Mass. 225, 228 (1975). In this instant case, the covenant not to compete is in effect for one year. Massachusetts appellate authority holds that a two-year restriction, following termination of employment is reasonable. See All Stainless, Inc. v. Colby, 364 Mass. 773, 779 (<HOLDING>). As such, a covenant not to compete containing
holding employment agreement consisting entirely of a covenant not to compete unenforceable because the covenant must be supported by valuable consideration holding that a covenant not to compete for two years was enforceable holding that the restraint of a covenant not to compete must be reasonable under the facts and circumstances of the particular case and that only a legitimate business interest may be protected by the covenant holding that the evidence was sufficient to demonstrate retaliation for activities that occurred two years prior to the termination holding that michigan courts would not enforce a covenant not to compete which violates mcla 445761 even though the covenant would have been enforceable in missouri where the contract was executed