# Coates v. Bastian Brothers, Inc

> Michigan Court of Appeals · October 26, 2007 · 276 Mich. App. 498

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9739622

## Case

- **Full name:** Coates v. Bastian Brothers, Inc.
- **Court:** Michigan Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** October 26, 2007
- **Citations:** 276 Mich. App. 498; 741 N.W.2d 539
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Saad
- **Judges:** Smolenski, Saad, Wilder
- **Cited by:** 173 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9739622

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that a competitive business interest sufficient to justify imposing a restrictive covenant must be “greater than merely preventing competition.”
- holding that a bar on competition “within one hundred . . . miles of any business location” was reasonable
- observing that this Court "will not reverse if the right result is reached, albeit for the wrong reason"

## Opinion text

SAAD, J.
(concurring in part and dissenting in part). I concur with the majority regarding all issues except its holding regarding the enforceability of the noncompetition agreement. Because defendants failed to preserve this issue, I would hold that defendants waived their claim concerning the noncompetition agreement. However, inasmuch as the majority addresses this issue despite defendants’ waiver, I write separately because I disagree with the majority’s holding that the noncom-petition provision is enforceable. Because defendants breached the just-cause provision of the employment agreement, I would hold that the plaintiff is not bound by the noncompetition provision of the employment agreement. The employer should not be allowed to wrongfully terminate plaintiffs’ employment and then gain by this wrongful conduct the advantage of preventing the wrongfully discharged employee from securing employment, in her field, with defendants’ competitor.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9739622. Public record. Not legal advice.