Nancy Levy worked for Health Care Financial Enterprises, Inc and signed an agreement not

to compete in June 1992. When Levy left Health Care and opened up her own similar

business in 1993, Health Care brought a court action to enforce the agreement.

The trial court concluded that the agreement prevented Levy from working in too broad a

geographical area and thus refused to enforce it. The parties therefore appeal to appellate

court reversed this ruling and remanded the case with instructions to modify the geographical

area to make it reasonable and then enforce the agreement.

Generally, what interests are served by refusing to enforce agreement not to compete?

What interests are served by allowing them to be enforced?

What arguments could be made in support of and against modifying (and then enforcing)

illegal agreement not to compete?