 | Alexander Haring - 1910 - 542 str.
...only as to afford a fair protection to the interests of the party in favor of whom it is given, and not so large as to interfere with the interests of the public." When the restraint is general, but at the same time is coextensive only with the interest to be protected,... | |
 | 1910 - 446 str.
...only as to afford a fair protection as to the interests of the party in favor of whom it is given, and not so large as to interfere with the interests of the public. Whatsoever restraint is larger than the necessary protection of the party can be of no benefit to either;... | |
 | American Bar Association - 1911 - 1064 str.
...only as to afford a fair protection to the interests of the party in favor of whom it is given, and not so large as to interfere with the interests of the public.' " The case of Montague vs. Lowry, 193 US 38, was a case where there was a combination of wholesale... | |
 | Joseph Asbury Joyce - 1911 - 870 str.
...only as to afford a fair protection to the interests of the party in favor of whom it. is given, and not so large as to interfere with the interests of the public. Whatever restraint is larger than necessary for the protection of the party can be of no benefit to... | |
 | William Theophilus Brantly - 1912 - 590 str.
...only as to afford a fair protection to the interests of the party in favor of whom it is given, and not so large as to interfere with the interests of the public. Whatever restraint is larger than the necessary protection of the party can be of no benefit to either.... | |
 | 1912 - 1004 str.
...are [43] no more than necessary to afford a fair protection to the business of the complainant and not so large as to interfere with the interests of the public. There can be no hard and fast rule by which the result can be reached in such cases. At last the question... | |
 | Charles Erehart Chadman - 1912 - 676 str.
...only as to afford a fair protection to the interest of the party in favor of whom it is given, and not so large as to interfere with the interests of the public. Whatever restraint is larger than the necessary protection of the party, can be of no benefit to either.... | |
 | American School (Lansing, Ill.), Howard Strickland Abbott - 1913 - 496 str.
...only as to afford a fair protection to the interests of the party in favor of whom it is given, and not so large as to interfere with the interests of the public." The case of Montague v. Lowry, 193 US 38, was a case where there was a combination of wholesale dealers... | |
 | Colorado. Supreme Court - 1913 - 672 str.
...was only affording 'a fair protection to the interests of the party in favor of whom it is given, and not so large as to interfere with the interests of the public.' The restraint was no larger than the needs of the covenantee required. It was of material 'benefit... | |
| |
And we do not see how a better test can be applied to the question whether reasonable or not, than by considering whether the restraint is such only as to afford a fair protection to the interests of the party in favour of whom it is given, and not so... 
