Case Brief of Mccart V. Block
Brief of McCart v H&R Block, Inc.
Case Name, Citation, and Court
Robert McCart and June McCart, v. H &R Block. Inc.
470 N.E.2d 756; 1984 Ind. App. LEXIS 3039
Court of Appeals of Indiana, Third District
Key Facts
Mr. McCart opened a tax preparation business and executed a contract with Block to be a district manager, which precluded him from operating a tax business in the same city. McCart then issued the city franchise to his wife. Years later, the wife signed a new franchise agreement, which contained a covenant not to compete. The wife terminated the agreement and H&R Block reissued the franchise; however, McCart continued to operate a tax preparation service in the city. H&R Block filed suit and the trial court enjoined McCart from operating in the city and McCart sought review. The court affirmed because it was not necessary to show that McCart signed the agreement before enjoining him from assisting the breach of the agreement by his wife and the evidence supported the finding that they acted together to breach her agreement with H&R Block.
Issue
1. Did the covenant not to compete contained in the agreement signed by June apply to Robert so that he could be enjoined from competing with Block?
2. Was the covenant unenforceable as a restraint of trade?
3. Did the court err by finding Block had no adequate remedy at law?
Holding
1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Waived, no authority and no argument was presented to support this argument.
Court’s Reasoning
1. That because of the joint efforts of the defendants to breach the satellite franchise agreement between the plaintiff and the defendants, the defendants should be enjoined from engaging in the business of preparing federal and state income tax returns.
2. That because the defendants have attempted to establish an income tax preparation business relying upon the supplies, slogans, customer listing, telephone listings, and mail in which the plaintiff, H & R Block has a proprietary interest the
Case Name, Citation, and Court
Robert McCart and June McCart, v. H &R Block. Inc.
470 N.E.2d 756; 1984 Ind. App. LEXIS 3039
Court of Appeals of Indiana, Third District
Key Facts
Mr. McCart opened a tax preparation business and executed a contract with Block to be a district manager, which precluded him from operating a tax business in the same city. McCart then issued the city franchise to his wife. Years later, the wife signed a new franchise agreement, which contained a covenant not to compete. The wife terminated the agreement and H&R Block reissued the franchise; however, McCart continued to operate a tax preparation service in the city. H&R Block filed suit and the trial court enjoined McCart from operating in the city and McCart sought review. The court affirmed because it was not necessary to show that McCart signed the agreement before enjoining him from assisting the breach of the agreement by his wife and the evidence supported the finding that they acted together to breach her agreement with H&R Block.
Issue
1. Did the covenant not to compete contained in the agreement signed by June apply to Robert so that he could be enjoined from competing with Block?
2. Was the covenant unenforceable as a restraint of trade?
3. Did the court err by finding Block had no adequate remedy at law?
Holding
1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Waived, no authority and no argument was presented to support this argument.
Court’s Reasoning
1. That because of the joint efforts of the defendants to breach the satellite franchise agreement between the plaintiff and the defendants, the defendants should be enjoined from engaging in the business of preparing federal and state income tax returns.
2. That because the defendants have attempted to establish an income tax preparation business relying upon the supplies, slogans, customer listing, telephone listings, and mail in which the plaintiff, H & R Block has a proprietary interest the