Valley Medical Specialists v. Supreme Court of Arizona 1999 1) Facts a) Defendant, an internist and pulmonologist who specialized in the treatment of AIDS and HIV-positive patients and performing brachytherapy on cancer patients, was employed by Plaintiff Valley Medical Specialists (VMS). The parties entered into an employment agreement, which contained a restrictive covenant that prohibited Defendant from competing in the practice of medicine for a period of three (3) years, anywhere within a five mile radius of any of Plaintiffs’ business locations. After several years, Defendant left Plaintiffs’ employ, and began practicing medicine within the area defined by the restrictive covenant. 2) History a) Plaintiff brought suit seeking an injunction enforcing the covenant. The Trial Court denied the injunction, finding the covenant to be in violation of public policy and, alternatively, too broad to be enforceable b) The intermediate appellate court reversed, modifying the covenant so that it could be enforced, and Defendant appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court. 3) Issue a) Was the restrictive covenant normal and reasonable practice i) The test is whether the restraint is such only as to afford a fair protection to the interest of the part in favor of whom it is given and not so large as to interfere with the interest of the public. ii) The relationship between partners is analogous to the employer –employee relation ship. In those relationships the covenant are normally strictly construed against the employer iii) Preventing doctors from working for others employers harm patients and the general public by preventing the doctor from helping the public iv) The hardship that patients who live near the area and the issues they will face, will create a damage to the public and by this policy, the agreement to restrain the employee is invalid. 4) Judgment: Remanded