Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
No. 11-1889
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Lynchburg.
Norman K. Moon, Senior
District Judge. (6:10-cv-00017-NKM-BWC)
Argued:
Decided:
July 2, 2012
ARGUED:
Wyatt B. Durrette, Jr., DURRETTECRUMP PLC, Richmond,
Virginia, for Appellants.
Benjamin C. Fultz, FULTZ, MADDOX,
HOVIOUS & DICKENS, PLC, Louisville, Kentucky, for Appellee. ON
BRIEF:
J. Buckley Warden, IV, DURRETTECRUMP PLC, Richmond,
Virginia, for Appellants.
Everett S. Nelson, FULTZ, MADDOX,
HOVIOUS & DICKENS, PLC, Louisville, Kentucky, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM:
ProTherapy Associates, LLC, a provider of trained personnel
for skilled nursing facilities such as nursing homes, commenced
this breach-of-contract action against nine nursing homes, each
of
which
had
contracted
to
purchase
ProTherapys
services.
from
directly
or
indirectly
soliciting
or
hiring
with
in
the
May
2008,
nursing
ProTherapy
homes
to
entered
train,
into
its
provide,
and
days
2009,
the
after
executing
the
homes
parent
nursing
revised
contracts
corporation
in
notified
by
ProTherapy
ProTherapy,
contracts
but
with
at
the
lower
nursing
cost.
homes
While
were
still
the
in
The nursing
and
assisting
in
making
them
available
to
Reliant.
purpose
of
hiring
ProTherapys
in
employees,
ProTherapys
violated
contracts
the
nonsolicitation
provision
with
the
nursing homes.
Reliant
therapists.
to
indirectly
solicit
and
employ
ProTherapy
and
contended
which
the
ProTherapy.
that
under
parties
Alternatively,
controlling
agree
was
the
principles
applicable,
the
nursing
of
homes
Florida
law,
nonsolicitation
restraint
justification.
liquidated
on
commerce
The
damages
nursing
clause
without
legitimate
homes
also
contended
imposed
an
unconscionable
business
that
the
penalty,
The
district
ProTherapys
court
found
therapists
that
the
It
also
as
reasonably
business
the
nonsolicitation
necessary
to
interests.
protect
The
the
hired
12-
that
within
homes
prohibited
found
indirectly,
nursing
agreement
was
[ProTherapys]
court
valid
legitimate
concluded
that
the
Statutes
discontinuance
violation
of
542.335(1)(g)
was
the
directly
because
connected
restrictive
it
to
found
the
covenant.
that
nursing
Finally,
the
homes
the
court
modest
training
sum
the
in
light
therapists
of
and
ProTherapys
its
losses
greater
of
income
expenses
from
in
them.
From the district courts orders, dated May 3, 2011; May 25,
2011; July 21, 2011; and July 27, 2011, the nursing homes filed
this appeal.
After
considering
the
nursing
homes
arguments,
as
nursing
district
homes,
court.
we
See
affirm
for
ProTherapy
the
reasons
Associates,
given
LLC
v.
by
the
AFS
of
Bastian, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 6:10-cv-17 (W.D. Va. May
6
3, 2011); id. (May 25, 2011); id. (July 21, 2011); id. (July 27,
2011).
AFFIRMED