Cases from cite.case.law:

COLLIER HMA PHYSICIAN MANAGEMENT, LLC, d b a a v. MENICHELLO, M. D., 223 So. 3d 334 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . We understand that in Corporate Express the court considered section 542.33, Florida Statutes (1985), . . . Section 542.335, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1996), replaced section 542.33 effective July 1, 1996. . . .

AVALON LEGAL INFORMATION SERVICES, INC. v. F. KEATING,, 110 So. 3d 75 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . Pettineo, 987 So.2d 763, 766 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008); see also § 542.33(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2008). . . .

DePUY ORTHOPAEDICS, INC. a v. WAXMAN,, 95 So. 3d 928 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . In the second case, Corporate Express, the Florida Supreme Court analyzed and applied section 542.33 . . . provision applies to non-compete agreements entered into before July 1, 1996, at which time section 542.33 . . . Section 542.331, Florida Statutes (2002), specifically provides that the repeal of section 542.33 does . . . (Fla. 2d DCA 2003), the Second District also analyzed and applied the predecessor statute, section 542.33 . . . and Joint Venture are governed by section 542.335, Florida Statutes (2002), which replaced section 542.33 . . .

PROTHERAPY ASSOCIATES, LLC, v. AFS OF BASTIAN, INC. d b a, 782 F. Supp. 2d 206 (W.D. Va. 2011)

. . . However, Miller involved application of Florida Statutes § 542.12, later renumbered § 542.33, which is . . .

BAUER, d b a v. DILIB, INC. a d b a, 16 So. 3d 318 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . held that the power to enjoin third parties derives from section 542.335 or its predecessor, section 542.33 . . . In 1996, the Legislature significantly rewrote section 542.33 as new section 542.335. . . . Section 542.33 continued to govern restrictive covenants entered before July 1, 1996, while section 542.335 . . .

PROUDFOOT CONSULTING COMPANY, a v. GORDON,, 576 F.3d 1223 (11th Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 542.33(2)(a), which does not apply to the Agreement, Fla. Stat. § 542.331. Fla. . . . Stat. § 542.33(2)(a) stated that certain restrictive covenants "may, in the discretion of a court of . . .

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. v. CARTER,, 9 So. 3d 1258 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . By contrast, the previous version provided that, except to the extent authorized in section 542.33(2) . . . See § 542.33(1), Fla. Stat. (1995). . . . appellate court reversed the temporary injunction, explaining the then-applicable statute, section 542.33 . . . Unlike our present case, Kep-hart: (1) involved application of the earlier statute (section 542.33) governing . . .

W. MILLER, v. PREEFER, L., 1 So. 3d 1278 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . adverse parties in the 1992 litigation never shared any of the relationships identified in section 542.33 . . . legislature set forth exceptions to this general bar, in certain specified circumstances, in section 542.33 . . . there is no question that the parties do not satisfy any of the relationship requirements of section 542.33 . . . Section 542.33 applies to the instant case and appeal. . . . The 1993 version of section 542.33 provided, in pertinent part, as follows: (1) Notwithstanding other . . .

USI INSURANCE SERVICES OF FLORIDA INC. v. PETTINEO, a, 987 So. 2d 763 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . The error in this case stems from the application of section 542.33, the predecessor version of section . . . Relying on case law applying the superseded section 542.33, Florida Statutes (1995), the trial court . . .

LEESBURG COMMUNITY CANCER CENTER, v. LEESBURG REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, INC., 972 So. 2d 203 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . that the exclusivity clause constituted an unlawful restraint of trade, unenforceable under section 542.33 . . .

BROWN BROWN, INC. v. ALI,, 494 F. Supp. 2d 943 (N.D. Ill. 2007)

. . . Florida law permits such restrictions on competition with former customers of employers: “Subsection 542.33 . . .

L. ALVAREZ, M. D. v. M. RENDON, M. D., 953 So. 2d 702 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . Under section 542.33(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2005): One who sells the goodwill of a business, or any . . .

WHITBY a k a LLC, LLC, v. INFINITY RADIO INC., 951 So. 2d 890 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . Appellants argue that the trial court erred in applying section 542.335, and not its predecessor, section 542.33 . . .

In WORLDCOM, INC., 343 B.R. 486 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2006)

. . . Stat. 542.33 (2005) (Stating that a contract in restraint of trade “may, in the discretion of a court . . .

O. HENAO, v. PROFESSIONAL SHOE REPAIR, INC. A., 929 So. 2d 723 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . Forbes, 483 So.2d 483 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), holds that under section 542.33, Florida Statutes (1983), a . . . The court then noted that section 542.33 provides for recognition of a limited class of covenants not . . . Section 542.33, however, was repealed with respect to restrictive covenants entered into or having an . . . In contrast to section 542.33(1), which provides that, except to the extent authorized in subsections . . . As noted above, unlike section 542.33, section 542.335(1) is expansive in scope. . . .

LEIGHTON, a v. FIRST UNIVERSAL LENDING, LLC, a, 925 So. 2d 462 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . We acknowledge the trial court applied a statute, section 542.33, Florida Statutes, which had been repealed . . .

J. COLUCCI, v. EAR RARE AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, INC., 918 So. 2d 431 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . Section 542.33 permits an owner selling his business to be bound by an agreement precluding his competition . . . See § 542.33, Fla. Stat. (2005). . . .

GRAY, a v. PRIME MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC., 912 So. 2d 711 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . Restrictive covenants with an effective date before July 1, 1996 are governed by section 542.33, Florida . . .

COOPER, v. THOMAS CRAIG COMPANY, LLP,, 906 So. 2d 378 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . We note, however, that the parties assumed that the 1990 version of section 542.33, Florida Statutes, . . . The legislature amended section 542.33(2)(a), effective June 28, 1990. . . . parties’ noncompetition agreement predates the statutory amendment, the pre-1990 version of section 542.33 . . . instances involving use of trade secrets, customer lists, or direct solicitation of existing customers. § 542.33 . . . Although the 1990 amendment to section 542.33(2)(a) did not apply to Mr. . . .

MARX, D. III, v. CLEAR CHANNEL BROADCASTING, INC. d b a WJNO, 887 So. 2d 405 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . . § 542.33(2)(a) (“one who is employed ... may agree with ... his employer to refrain from carrying on . . . non-competition agreement and then only so long as that employer stays in the same business in the same area. § 542.33 . . . At the same time, it repealed the old section 542.33 as to non-competition agreements made after July . . . 1, 1996, but provided that old section 542.33 would continue to govern agreements, like the present . . . nature of the public policy regarding non-competition provisions in employment agreements under section 542.33 . . .

DIBATTISTO, v. PSS WORLD MEDICAL, INC. v. PSS, 110 F. App'x 837 (9th Cir. 2004)

. . . . § 542.33(2)(a), provides, at a minimum, one of the bases for the conclusion of the possibility of irreparable . . .

SCARBROUGH, v. LIBERTY NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE CO., 872 So. 2d 283 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . restraining persons from exercising their lawful professions are void unless expressly authorized by section 542.33 . . . Section 542.33(2)(a) provides, in pertinent part: [0]ne who is employed as an agent, independent contractor . . .

E. WOLF, D. V. M. v. JAMES G. BARRIE, P. A., 858 So. 2d 1083 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . This noncompete agreement is governed by section 542.33(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1991). . . . Central Garage, Inc., 579 So.2d 127, 131 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), A plain reading of section 542.33(2)(a) . . . Section 542.33(2)(a) requires that the employer must be engaged in the business that the covenant seeks . . . on how a “temporary cessation of business” might affect a restrictive covenant governed by section 542.33 . . . The statute at issue in this case is the 1991 version of section 542.33(2)(a). . . .

KFORCE, INC. f k a a v. MICKENBERG, f k a B., 846 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . Under section 542.33(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1995), “solicitation of existing customers shall be presumed . . .

PASSALACQUA, E- a v. NAVIANT, INC. a f k a E-, 844 So. 2d 792 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . More particularly, the predecessor statute, section 542.33, Florida Statutes (1989). . . .

CORPORATE EXPRESS OFFICE PRODUCTS, INC. v. PHILLIPS,, 847 So. 2d 406 (Fla. 2003)

. . . provision applies to non-compete agreements entered into before July 1, 1996, at which time section 542.33 . . . Section 542.331, Florida Statutes (2002), specifically provides that the repeal of section 542.33 does . . . Section 542.33 contains no mention of assignments. See Pino v. Spanish Broad. . . . Sys. of Fla., Inc., 564 So.2d 186, 188-89 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (legislature in enacting section 542.33 . . . Section 542.33 remains applicable as to all agreements entered prior thereto. . . .

AMERICA II ELECTRONICS, INC. v. SMITH,, 830 So. 2d 906 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . It was decided under the 1991 version of section 542.33(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1991), which provided . . . As to those agreements, section 542.33 was repealed and a new statute, section 542.335, controlled. . . .

MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER SMITH, INC. v. D. DUNN,, 191 F. Supp. 2d 1346 (M.D. Fla. 2002)

. . . Under Florida Statute §§ 542.33(2)(a), Plaintiff is presumed to suffer irreparable harm by Defendants . . .

SNELLING AND SNELLING, INC. a a v. J. REYNOLDS, MTX, 140 F. Supp. 2d 1314 (M.D. Fla. 2001)

. . . According to the Section 542.33, Florida Statutes, two parties may lawfully enter into a non-compete . . . Stat. 542.33(1)(b) (2000). . . . Stat. 542.33(2)(a) (2000). . . .

TRI- COUNTY SWEEPING SERVICES, INC. a v. LAWSON,, 757 So. 2d 1290 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . The trial court found that the covenant was “void as a matter of law pursuant to § 542.33[,]Contracts . . . Effective July 1, 1996, section 542.33 was repealed. . . . . § 542.33 Fla. Stat. (1999). . § 542.335, Fla. Stat. (1999). . . .

R. LOTENFOE, M. D. v. C. PAHK, M. D., 747 So. 2d 422 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . Section 542.33, Florida Statutes (1995), controls enforcement of this non-competition clause because . . . (Supp.1996) (section 542.33 governs enforcement of contracts entered into before July 1996). . . . Section 542.33 states that direct solicitation of customers “shall be presumed to be an irreparable injury . . . Johnson, however, interpreted section 542.33, Florida Statutes (1987). As we explained in Hapney v. . . . Village Key & Saw Shop, 656 So.2d 475 (Fla.1995), this version of section 542.33 con-lained a presumption . . .

GLOBE DATA SYSTEMS d b a Co. v. JOHNSON,, 745 So. 2d 1101 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . That agreement, however, and its review under section 542.33, Florida Statutes (1991), governs the outcome . . . Subsection 542.33(1) prohibits all contracts in restraint of trade unless they fall under subsection . . . Under this version of section 542.33, irreparable injury is not normally presumed upon proof of breach . . .

SEARS TERMITE AND PEST CONTROL, INC. v. ARNOLD, d b a, 745 So. 2d 485 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . See § 542.33(2)(a), Fla. . . .

J. K. R. INC. K. v. TRIPLE CHECK TAX SERVICE, INC. a, 736 So. 2d 43 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . Hair Returns, Inc., 685 So.2d 959 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (under section 542.33, Florida Statutes (1995), . . .

DIAZ, v. JOHN ADCOCK INSURANCE AGENCY, INC. a, 729 So. 2d 465 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . Section 542.33(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1993), expressly provided that injunctions to enforce such agreements . . .

JOHNSON ENTERPRISES OF JACKSONVILLE, INC. a v. FPL GROUP, INC. a FPL a a, 162 F.3d 1290 (11th Cir. 1998)

. . . Stat. ch. 542.33 (1997); see also Fla. . . . Stat. ch. 542.331 (1997) (repealing chapter 542.33 but stating that it continues to govern contracts . . .

CHS FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. a d b a H. H. v. SMALL BUSINESS CONSULTANTS, INC. a, 722 So. 2d 245 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . agreement, SBC sought a preliminary injunction to enforce the terms of the agreement pursuant to section 542.33 . . .

HEALTH CARE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES, INC. v. LEVY,, 715 So. 2d 341 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . Before the 1990 amendment, section 542.33(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1989) provided in pertinent part: . . . Florida, amended section 542.33(2)(a) by adding the following two sentences: However, the court shall . . . existing customers shall be presumed to be an irreparable injury and may be specifically enjoined. § 542.33 . . .

AMERICAN RESIDENTIAL SERVICES, INC. a R. v. EVENT TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. a, 715 So. 2d 1048 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . appellee predicated its request for temporary injunc-tive relief on an inapplicable statute, section 542.33 . . . If anything, by relying on section 542.33 appellee arguably held itself to a higher standard than the . . .

K. KING, M. D. P. A. v. G. JESSUP, M. D., 698 So. 2d 339 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . Section 542.33 establishes the legal principles applicable to covenants not to compete. . . . the legislature severely weakened covenants in favor of the breaching competitor by amending section 542.33 . . . to read as follows: 542.33 Contracts in restraint of trade valid.— * if! . . . King failed to establish an irreparable injury required by section 542.33. Dr. . . . Section 542.33 has since been repealed with respect to restrictive covenants entered into or having an . . .

THE CHASE MANHATTAN BANK v. THE DIME SAVINGS BANK OF NEW YORK, F. S. B. A., 961 F. Supp. 275 (M.D. Fla. 1997)

. . . . § 542.33(2)(a) provides for a presumptive finding of irreparable harm for breaches of non-compete promises . . .

J. BRADLEY, III, v. HEALTH COALITION, INC., 687 So. 2d 329 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . The statute applicable here is section 542.33, Florida Statutes (1991). . . . As amended in 1990, section 542.33 has placed restrictions on the availability of in-junctive relief . . . existing customers shall be presumed to be an irreparable injury and may be specifically enjoined.” § 542.33 . . . Prooslin, 482 So.2d at 489-90 (temporary injunction must not disserve the public interest); § 542.33, . . . Under section 542.33, Health Coalition is not entitled to an injunction unless it proves the element . . .

KEPHART, v. HAIR RETURNS, INC., 685 So. 2d 959 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . Section 542.33, Florida Statutes (1995), provides in pertinent part as follows: (1) Notwithstanding other . . .

W. DYER, v. PIONEER CONCEPTS, INC., 667 So. 2d 961 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . Section 542.33(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1993), provides that an employee may agree with his or her employer . . .

In PRINTRONICS, INC., 189 B.R. 995 (Bankr. N.D. Fla. 1995)

. . . Florida Statutes § 542.33(2)(b). . . . Furthermore, Florida courts have not determined that § 542.33 is an “exclusive list of non-competition . . . Fla.Stat.Ann. § 542.33(2)(b) (West 1995). . . .

J. THOMAS Co- v. ALLOY FASTENERS, INC., 664 So. 2d 59 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . evidence established that the employee had entered into a covenant not to compete governed by paragraph 542.33 . . .

HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT CONSULTING, INC. a v. J. McCOMBES,, 661 So. 2d 1223 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . basis that HCMC had no legitimate business interests to be protected within the meaning of section 542.33 . . . Section 542.33(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1989), provides in pertinent part: [O]ne who is employed as an . . . Chapter 90-216, Section 1, Laws of Florida, amended section 542.33(2)(a) on June 28, 1990, by adding . . . existing customers shall be presumed to be an irreparable injury and may be specifically enjoined. § 542.33 . . .

GUPTON, v. VILLAGE KEY SAW SHOP, INC., 656 So. 2d 475 (Fla. 1995)

. . . case to the trial court for entry of an injunction that complies with the pre-1990 version of section 542.33 . . . The judge based the injunction on a 1990 amendment to section 542.33(2)(a), even though the parties had . . . Gupton presents two issues for our review: First, whether the 1990 amendments to section 542.33 should . . . The legislature amended section 542.33(2)(a) in 1990 to require evidence of irreparable injury and to . . . The court found that the pre-1990 version of section 542.33 did not require a showing of irreparable . . .

R. SABINA a v. DAHLIA CORPORATION, a, 650 So. 2d 96 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . discussion that the list prepared by Sabina from memory qualifies as a customer list under section 542.33 . . .

VILLAGE KEY AND SAW SHOP, INC. v. GUPTON,, 656 So. 2d 164 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . against Joseph Gupton [“Gupton”], relying on the limitations imposed under the 1990 amendments to section 542.33 . . . court’s dismissal of the second action might not have been correct under the revised version of section 542.33 . . . non-compete clauses) because we previously held that this case is governed by the pre-1990 version of section 542.33 . . .

COULTER CORPORATION, v. LEINERT,, 869 F. Supp. 732 (E.D. Mo. 1994)

. . . . § 542.33. . . .

M. KUPSCZNK, v. BLASTERS, INC., 647 So. 2d 888 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . See § 542.33, Fla.Stat. (1991); Hapney; Sarasota Beverage Co. v. . . .

STATE CHEMICAL MANUFACTURING COMPANY, v. M. LOPEZ, a, 642 So. 2d 1127 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . The issue on appeal is controlled by section 542.33(2)(a), Florida Statutes, as amended in chapter 90 . . . of irreparable injury does not attach to an allegation of employment with a competitor under section 542.33 . . . Section 542.33(2)(a) provides: (2)(a) One ... who is employed as an agent, independent contractor, or . . .

SERVPRO INDUSTRIES, INC. v. D. SPOHN, 638 So. 2d 1001 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . One exception, applicable to the present case, is found in section 542.33(2)(b), which allows a licensor . . . or any person deriving title from the licensor, continues to carry on a like business therein.... § 542.33 . . . non-competition clause between a corporation and an independent contractor not permissible under section 542.33 . . . Section 542.33(1), Florida Statutes, provides that “[Ejvery contract by which anyone is restrained from . . . goodwill from him, and so long as such employer continues to carry on a like business therein.... § 542.33 . . .

VILLAGE KEY SAW SHOP, INC. v. GUPTON,, 639 So. 2d 102 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . court erred by only partially enforcing the noncom-pete clause and contends that, pursuant to section 542.33 . . . noted by either party, because the contract was entered into in 1989, the 1990 amendment to section 542.33 . . . Chapter 90-216, section 1, Laws of Florida, amended section 542.33(2)(a), effective June 28, 1990 by . . .

SPENCER PEST CONTROL COMPANY OF FLORIDA, INC. v. E. SMITH,, 637 So. 2d 292 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . profession, trade or business void unless such restraint is expressly permitted by section 542.33(2) . . . or section 542.33(3). . . . Section 542.33(3) is inapplicable because it relates only to partners. . . . Section 542.33(2) permits an employee to contract “to refrain from carrying on or engaging in a similar . . . Section 542.33(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1993). . . . based upon the court’s finding that there had been no showing of irreparable injury pursuant to section 542.33 . . .

LOVELL FARMS, INC. a v. LEVY,, 641 So. 2d 103 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . For many years, courts narrowly construed section 542.33(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1989), governing non-compete . . . In 1990, the Legislature amended section 542.33(2)(a), Florida Statutes (Supp.1990), with the intent . . . The relevant portion of section 542.33(2)(a) now provides: [O]ne who is employed as an agent, independent . . . Central Garage, Inc., 579 So.2d 127, 134 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 591 So.2d 180 (Fla.1991); § 542.33 . . . Section 542.33(2)(a), Fla.Stat. (Supp.1990). . . . Under section 542.33(1), (2)(a), Florida Statutes (1993), the use of trade secrets creates a presumption . . .

PHP HEALTHCARE CORPORATION, v. EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,, 14 F.3d 941 (4th Cir. 1993)

. . . . § 542.33 (Supp.1991) which, in relevant part, provides: one who is employed as an ... employee may . . . We therefore conclude that under the express terms of Fla.Stat.Ann. § 542.33 (Supp. 1991), the ongoing . . .

JEWETT ORTHOPAEDIC CLINIC, P. A. v. M. WHITE, M. D., 629 So. 2d 922 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . enforcement of the agreement would be contrary to the public health, safety and welfare under section 542.33 . . . The question is controlled by the provisions of the current version of section 542.33, Florida Statutes . . . The Second District Court of Appeal found this requirement to be implied in section 542.33. . . . the same factors the legislature selected in creating a presumption of irreparable harm in section 542.33 . . . this court previously observed in Chandra, when the legislature made substantial changes to section 542.33 . . .

ROYAL FLORAL DISTRIBUTORS, INC. v. KARUKIN,, 625 So. 2d 1307 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . Indus., 603 So.2d 516 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); § 542.33, Fla.Stat. (1991). . . .

COASTAL COMPUTER CORPORATION, v. TEAM MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC., 624 So. 2d 352 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . Section 542.33, Florida Statutes (1991), empowers a court to enforce a noncompetition agreement by injunction . . .

ICE COLD AUTO AIR OF CLEARWATER, INC. a d b a a d b a a d b a a d b a CASC, a d b a d b a a d b a a d b a v. COLD AIR ACCESSORIES, INC. a d b a A. a d b a C L a d b a d b a, 828 F. Supp. 925 (M.D. Fla. 1993)

. . . Florida Statutes § 495.151 Count VI: violation of a non-compete agreement under Florida Statutes § 542.33 . . .

CHANDRA, M. D. v. GADODIA, M. D., 610 So. 2d 15 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . on the law as it existed prior to June 28, 1990, the effective date of the 1990 amendment to section 542.33 . . . Chapter 90-216, Section 1, Laws of Florida, amended section 542.33(2)(a) on June 28, 1990, by adding . . . The Hapney majority seems to have determined that the amendment was remedial by finding that section 542.33 . . . Prior to the 1990 amendment of section 542.33, a complaint alleging the existence of a contract, an intentional . . .

MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER SMITH, INC. v. HAGERTY,, 808 F. Supp. 1555 (S.D. Fla. 1992)

. . . In Hapney, the court held that under § 542.12 Fla.Stat., now § 542.33, an enforceable non-competition . . . Section 542.33 of the Florida Statutes provides that the “use of specific trade secrets, customer lists . . . See, e.g., Fla.Stat. §§ 542.33, 608.001, 812.081. . . .

APPLEWHITE v. SHEEN FINANCIAL RESOURCES, INC. a a, 608 So. 2d 80 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . appellants for breach of the non-competition clauses, seeking injunctive relief pursuant to section 542.33 . . .

SUN ELASTIC CORPORATION, v. O. B. INDUSTRIES,, 603 So. 2d 516 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . I am unable to agree with the majority’s suggestion that section 542.33, Florida Statutes (1991), creates . . . though submission of a bid could be characterized as “direct solicitation of existing customers.” § 542.33 . . . It is no accident that section 542.33 is codified in chapter 542, which regulates combinations restricting . . . The recent amendments to section 542.33 have reduced the number of protectable interests, and forbid . . . enforcement of a noncompete agreement “where there is no showing of irreparable injury.” § 542.33(2)( . . . Even under the 1990 amendment to section 542.33(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1989), which was evidently intended . . . The present version of the statute is as follows: 542.33 Contracts in restraint of trade valid.— (1) . . . [e.s~1 §~ 542.33(1), (2)(a), Fla.Stat. (1991). . B. . . . In the present area of noncompete agreements, which are validated by Section 542.33, Florida Statutes . . . Its attempt to do so may well have rendered a valid contract, see § 542.33(1), Fla.Stat. (1991), completely . . .

MIAMI ELECTRONICS CENTER, INC. a v. SAPORTA d b a, 597 So. 2d 903 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . not entitled to an injunction because it failed to prove irreparable injury as required by Section 542.33 . . .

MEDX, INC. v. T. RANGER, 788 F. Supp. 288 (E.D. La. 1992)

. . . . § 542.33: “(1) trade secrets and confidential business lists, records, and information, (2) customer . . .

In PORT- A- PIT, INC. a k a A- B- PORT- A- PIT, INC. a k a A- B- v. GERHART,, 138 B.R. 624 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1992)

. . . . § 542.33(2)(a) (1987); Sarasota Beverage Co. v. . . .

AGS COMPUTER SERVICES, INC. d b a AGS a v. RODRIGUEZ,, 592 So. 2d 801 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . Pursuant to section 542.33, Florida Statutes (Supp.1990), irreparable injury is no longer presumed upon . . .

MEDX INC. OF FLORIDA v. T. RANGER, 780 F. Supp. 398 (E.D. La. 1991)

. . . VALIDITY OF THE NONCOMPETE COVENANT UNDER FLORIDA LAW Florida Statute 542.33(2)(a) (1990) provides in . . . Fla.Stat. 542.33(2)(a) (1990). . . .

J. HORN, v. HAVERFIELD CORPORATION,, 585 So. 2d 1203 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . We need not determine whether the amendment to § 542.33(2)(a) should be applied in the enforcement of . . .

UNITED MARINE, INC. v. RAILL,, 584 So. 2d 1137 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . See also § 542.33, Fla.Stat. (Supp.1990). Affirmed. . . .

CARNAHAN, v. ALEXANDER PROUDFOOT COMPANY WORLD HEADQUARTERS, a a, 581 So. 2d 184 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . The use of injunctive relief in cases involving covenants not to compete is authorized by section 542.33 . . . issue in 1987 and breached it in 1989; however, there is some indication that the amendment to section 542.33 . . .

P. HAPNEY, v. CENTRAL GARAGE, INC. a d b a, 579 So. 2d 127 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . , i.e., to add by judicial fiat to the contract in this case and to the pre-1990 version of section 542.33 . . . Employment contracts containing non-competition agreements are valid and enforceable in Florida. § 542.33 . . . The pre-1990 version of section 542.33, the version on which the outcome of this case turns, specifically . . . This refers to the 1989 version of 542.33 which is entitled “Contracts in restraint of trade valid” and . . . Accordingly, the majority opinion, by effectively amending the pre-1990 version of section 542.33 by . . . Section 542.33(2)(a) is clearly in derogation of the common law and must be strictly construed. . . . A plain reading of section 542.33(2)(a) dispels any notion that the legislature intended to dispense . . . We address this 1990 amendment to section 542.33 because the trial court found that Hapney “received . . . The right created by section 542.12, and carried forward in section 542.33(2)(a), is to enter into a . . . Paragraph (a) of subsection (2) of section 542.33, Florida Statutes, is amended to read: 542.33 Contracts . . .

A. SCHECK, v. BURGER KING CORPORATION,, 756 F. Supp. 543 (S.D. Fla. 1991)

. . . . § 542.33(2)(a) (1989). . . .

SALAMON, M. D. v. KARAN MUNUSWAMY, M. D. P. A., 566 So. 2d 899 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . breach by the employee, irreparable harm, and his entitlement to an injunction, pursuant to section 542.33 . . .

PINO a a No. a v. SPANISH BROADCASTING SYSTEM OF FLORIDA, INC., 564 So. 2d 186 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . Viva and Pino counterclaimed for declaratory relief, contending that under section 542.33(2)(a), Florida . . . Ultimately, the trial court concluded that section 542.33, Florida Statutes (1985), did not preclude . . . A review of the statute relied on by appellants reveals that the legislature, in enacting section 542.33 . . . Despite the apparently broad ambit of section 542.33(2)(a), appellants contend that the statute cannot . . . Section 542.33(2)(a) provides that: [O]ne who is employed as an agent or employee may agree with his . . .

W. KOST, INC. v. WEYRES, 38 Fla. Supp. 2d 168 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1989)

. . . Thus, under applicable case law construing F.S. 542.33, this Court is limited to determining the reasonable . . .

SARASOTA BEVERAGE COMPANY, v. JOHNSON, 551 So. 2d 503 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . with Judge Campbell’s dissenting opinion, would substantially undercut the effectiveness of section 542.33 . . . Why section 542.33(2)(a) should be effective, i.e., why it was enacted and serves a state interest, is . . . Woods, 110 So.2d 397 (Fla.1959); § 542.33, Fla.Stat. (1987). . . . It is only by an exception provided in section 542.33(2) and (3) that the common law prohibition and . . . the general prohibition of section 542.33(1) is relaxed. . . . I do not believe that the enforcement of section 542.33, Florida Statutes (1988), mandates a conclusive . . . We first observe that section 542.33, Florida Statutes (1987), has validated non-competition agreements . . . Employment contracts containing non-competition agreements are valid and enforceable in Florida. § 542.33 . . .

MENDEZ v. THE TWENTY- FOUR COLLECTION, INC., 35 Fla. Supp. 2d 184 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1989)

. . . The Law Florida Statute 542.33(2)(a), provides in pertinent part: “ . . . one who is employed as an agent . . .

DAD S PROPERTIES, INC. a d b a s, v. C. LUCAS, Al E. Al a, 545 So. 2d 926 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . See § 542.33, Fla.Stat. (1987). In West Shore Restaurant Corp. v. . . .

JUNIOR SALESMEN OF FLORIDA, INC. d b a v. BOGEAJIS,, 541 So. 2d 676 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . The parties agree no-compete clauses are governed by statute, section 542.33. . . .

XEROGRAPHICS, INC. v. THOMAS,, 537 So. 2d 140 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

. . . . § 542.33, Fla.Stat. (1985); Graphic Business Systems, Inc. v. . . .

JOSEPH U. MOORE, INC. v. A. HOWARD,, 534 So. 2d 935 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

. . . Neu, 500 So.2d 561, 563 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), rev. denied, 508 So.2d 15 (Fla.1987), “under section 542.33 . . .

FRUMKES, v. BEASLEY- REED BROADCASTING OF MIAMI, INC. a, 533 So. 2d 942 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

. . . Non-compete agreements and section 542.33(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1987), which permits them, are in . . .

BEST TOWING RECOVERY, INC. v. J. BEGGS, Sr., 531 So. 2d 243 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

. . . Finding that the noncompetition clause was invalid and unenforceable by reason of section 542.33, Florida . . . We turn first to the statute which states in relevant part: 542.33 Contracts in restraint of trade invalid . . .

FLORIDA PEST CONTROL AND CHEMICAL COMPANY, v. P. THOMAS,, 520 So. 2d 669 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

. . . Section 542.33(2)(a), Florida Statutes. . . . Section 542.33(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1985) provides, in part, that “one who is employed as an agent . . .

ORKIN EXTERMINATING COMPANY, INC. v. BLACK, 27 Fla. Supp. 2d 11 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1988)

. . . INJUNCTION Plaintiff having filed herein its Complaint for Injunction and equitable relief, under F.S. 542.33 . . .

PERSAN, v. SUN MOBILE PRODUCTS, INC., 518 So. 2d 951 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

. . . See § 542.33(2), Fla. Stat. (1985). . . .

A. KVERNE, v. ROLLINS PROTECTIVE SERVICES COMPANY, a, 515 So. 2d 1320 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . Keller, 389 So.2d 1062 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980) rev. denied, 419 So.2d 1048 (Fla.1982); § 542.33(2)(a), Fla . . .

AIR AMBULANCE NETWORK, INC. v. FLORIBUS,, 511 So. 2d 702 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . In the present area of noncompete agreements, which are validated by Section 542.33, Florida Statutes . . .

E. MARSHALL, v. GORE, a k a F. L. M. R. B. a, 506 So. 2d 91 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . Appellant argues that the noncompete agreement violates section 542.33, Florida Statutes (1981) because . . .

T. K. COMMUNICATIONS, INC. d b a WSHE FM WSRF AM v. J. HERMAN, C. a a d b a WGTR FM AM WIOD AM,, 505 So. 2d 484 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . that these requirements are the general rule only and that proceedings involving section 542.12 (now 542.33 . . .

AMEDAS, INC. a v. BROWN,, 505 So. 2d 1091 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . write this concurring opinion to express my belief that the courts have inadvertently construed section 542.33 . . . The conclusion that an independent contractor cannot be an agent as defined in section 542.33 is contrary . . .

JOSEPH U. MOORE, INC. v. R. NEU,, 500 So. 2d 561 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . First, the court held that Moore’s noncompetition clause violated section 542.33(2), Florida Statutes . . . The court stated that section 542.33(2) only allows the employer to prohibit soliciting. . . . Section 542.33 provides that: (1) Every contract by which anyone is restrained from exercising a lawful . . . Under section 542.33(2)(a), an employer may prevent a former employee from engaging in any like business . . . We hold that the clause falls within the section 542.33(2)(a) exception. . . .

MICRO PLUS, INC. v. FORTE DATA SYSTEMS, INC. ANDERSON, v. FORTE DATA SYSTEMS, INC. a, 484 So. 2d 1340 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . The legislature has expressly recognized their validity by adoption of Section 542.33(2)(a). . . . Section 542.33(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1985), provides: One who sells the goodwill of a business, or . . .

J. FLATLEY, D. D. S. J. D. D. S. P. A. a v. L. S. FORBES, D. M. D. L. S. D. M. D. P. A. a, 483 So. 2d 483 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . answered the complaint contending that the covenant was void and unenforceable by reason of section 542.33 . . . In an effort to 'overcome the effect of section 542.33, Flat-ley asserts, in reliance upon Pensacola . . . The Legislature embodied in section 542.33 the common law’s abhorrence of contracts restraining competition . . . any kind, otherwise than is provided by subsections (2) and (3) hereof, is to that extent void.” § 542.33 . . . agreements may, in the discretion of a court of competent jurisdiction, be enforced by injunction. § 542.33 . . .

CORDIS CORPORATION, v. B. PROOSLIN,, 482 So. 2d 486 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . Section 542.33(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1983), specifically provides for enforcement of non-competition . . .

U. S. FLORAL CORP. a v. SALAZAR,, 475 So. 2d 1305 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . a temporary injunction to enforce a non-compete agreement entered into by the parties under Section 542.33 . . .