## Facts

- Rem Metals Corporation manufactured precision titanium castings for jet aircraft engines under contract for Pratt & Whitney; only a few firms produced these castings.
- Forrest L. Logan worked for Rem as a repair welder of titanium castings and signed two standard-form employment agreements containing noncompetition clauses.
- Each agreement barred Logan, for one year after termination, from engaging in any business competing with Rem anywhere in the United States, in any capacity.
- Logan’s welding work was subject to strict Pratt & Whitney specifications; welders had to be certified by Pratt & Whitney inspectors.
- Logan was one of only two or three Pratt & Whitney-certified welders at Rem and had a higher proficiency rating than other welders.
- Logan had learned titanium welding before joining Rem; Rem’s additional training was brief and did not involve trade secrets or confidential processes.
- Evidence showed certification could be achieved quickly: other welders became qualified after about 20 hours of training, and multiple Rem welders had been certified in the past.
- Logan did not handle customers and had no access to customer lists, pricing, or other confidential business information.
- After Rem denied Logan a wage increase, he resigned and accepted employment with Precision Castparts Corporation, a direct competitor.
- Rem claimed it lost business shortly after Logan left due to inadequate welding capacity but soon trained additional welders to meet Pratt & Whitney standards.
- Rem sued in equity to enforce the noncompetition clauses.

## Issues

1. Whether Rem had a legally protectible interest in Logan’s skills and knowledge as a skilled welder sufficient to justify enforcement of a post-employment noncompetition agreement as a reasonable restraint of trade.
2. Whether, absent trade secrets, confidential information, or special customer relationships, an injunction restraining Logan from working for a competitor could be enforced.

## Decision

- The Oregon Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s decree and declined to enforce the noncompetition clause.
- The court held Rem failed to show “special circumstances” establishing a protectible interest beyond ordinary competition and an employee’s general skills.
- Because Logan’s abilities were general and not derived from proprietary or secret training, and he possessed no confidential information or customer relationships, any restraint on his post-employment work was unjustified.
- The court rejected enforcement even though the trial court had narrowed the covenant to a six-month, Oregon-only injunction.

## Legal Principles

- Post-employment noncompetition agreements are disfavored restraints on trade and are enforceable only if the employer proves a legitimate protectible interest.
- A protectible interest typically requires “special circumstances,” such as trade secrets, confidential information, or customer relationships/goodwill that the employee could appropriate.
- An employer’s desire to avoid ordinary competition, even from a highly skilled employee, is not a sufficient basis to restrain the employee’s subsequent employment.
- Training that is brief, non-secret, and readily replicated does not convert an employee’s general skills into an employer-protectible interest.

## Conclusion

The court refused to restrain a skilled welder from working for a competitor because the employer showed no trade secrets, confidential information, or comparable protectible interest, making the noncompetition clause an unreasonable restraint of trade.


Rem Metals Corp. v. Logan, 278 Or. 715, 565 P.2d 1080 (Or. 1977)