Duffley And Snow Case Comparison – Assignment Example

Comparison and contrast of Duffley and Snow case
According to this case, the plaintiff signed the employment contract after he had begun working for the corporation. The defendant paid the plaintiff salary only when he worked under the supervision of a qualified sales individual. The plaintiff signed the employment and it had a restrictive agreement (de J. Pemberton & O'Neil, 1971).
On the other hand, the United States lawyer for Utah, Charles Hempstead, initiated the case in 1873. The case initiation was to determine judicially whether the United States of America elected Zerubbabel Snow, the territory attorney general, to prosecute offenders of territorial offence (de J. Pemberton & O'Neil, 1971).

The corporation awards the plaintiff his personal territory and a commission of the total sales. The defendant is a sales company dealing with numerous products for manufacturing companies. The two parties entered into an agreement that included a clause that deterred the plaintiff from competition after terminating the employment (Leagle.com, 2015). The court held that the Duffley had obtained a considerable change in his employment contract. The court protects employers from former employees who might use the skills their learnt while working for them in their recent jobs.

The court made a ruling that the Utah Organic Act provides the territorial Supreme Court in conjunction with district courts power to act as circuits. The role of the each court was distinct and every individual serving under the court should abide by the rule. The territorial courts should serve people when they sit in the territorial courts.

References
de J. Pemberton, J., & O'Neil, R. (1971). The Price of Dependency: Civil Liberties in the Welfare State. Harvard Law Review, 84(8), 1960. doi:10.2307/1339577
Leagle.com,. (2015). M. S. JACOBS & ASSOC., INC. v. DUFFLEY | Leagle.com. Retrieved 3 April 2015, from http://www.leagle.com/decision/197345466PaDampC2d388_1390