To access this feature, please Log In or Register for your Casebriefs Account.

Add to Library




Lucht’s Concrete Pumping, Inc. v. Horner

    Brief Fact Summary.

    Lucht’s Concrete Pumping, Inc. sued Horner for violating a non-compete agreement entered into by Horner when she was an employee of the company.

    Synopsis of Rule of Law.

    Continuing an at-will employment relationship constitutes sufficient consideration to support a contract.


    Horner was hired as an at-will employee for Lucht’s Concrete Pumping, Inc. (Lucht) and signed a non-compete agreement that prevented Horner from soliciting employees and customers from Lucht’s for 12 months after leaving employment with the company. Horner resigned a year later and began working for Everist Materials, LLC (Everist), a competitor of Lucht’s that shared many customers. Lucht sued Horner for breaching the non-compete agreement and Horner filed a motion for summary judgment claiming that there was not sufficient consideration to support the non-compete agreement. The trial court granted summary judgment to Horner and the appellate affirmed. Lucht appealed.


    Whether continuing an at-will employment relationship constitutes sufficient consideration to support a contract?


    Yes. The judgment of the appellate court is reversed and remanded. Lucht’s agreeing not to terminate Horner in exchange for Horney agreeing not to compete is adequate consideration to support a contract.

    Points of Law - for Law School Success

    Any benefit to a promisor or any detriment to a promisee at the time of the contract—no matter how slight—constitutes adequate consideration.

    View Full Point of Law

    Consideration exists where a party foregoes an action that a party is legally entitled to carry out. Lucht’s was entitled to let go Horner at any time, but let go of that right upon introducing the non-compete agreement.

    Create New Group

      Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following