The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
OMNIPLEX World Services Corp. v. US Investigations Services, Inc.
No. 042287Supreme Court of Virginia
042287 OMNIPLEX World Services Corp. v. US Investigations Services, Inc. 09/16/2005 In an action seeking to enforce an employment contract provision restricting a former employee from certain forms of subseque…
The clerk's words are shown exactly as filed.The activity
Orders, motions, and filings in the clerk's own words and sequence.
The source
The official docket and available court documents attached to every update.
042287 OMNIPLEX World Services Corp. v. US Investigations Services, Inc. 09/16/2005 In an action seeking to enforce an employment…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- September 16, 2005
No bill or executive-order citation is attached to this file.
Official docket
Case timeline
The clerk's wording is shown verbatim and linked to the court's own document page where available.
Docket entry
042287 OMNIPLEX World Services Corp. v. US Investigations Services, Inc. 09/16/2005 In an action seeking to enforce an employment contract provision restricting a former employee from certain forms of subsequent employment, the trial court correctly concluded that the non-competition provision was overly broad and unenforceable. Because the prohibition in this non-competition provision is not limited to employment that would be in competition with the former employer, the trial court's judgment is affirmed.
Open court document ↗Rulings in this case over time
Courts at different levels and stages can reach different results in the same case. Each entry is the court's own record; read it before drawing a conclusion.
1 entry, oldest first.
· Supreme Court of Virginia
Affirmed
The court's record, as written
042287 OMNIPLEX World Services Corp. v. US Investigations Services, Inc. 09/16/2005 In an action seeking to enforce an employment contract provision restricting a former employee from certain forms of subsequent employment, the trial court correctly concluded that the non-competition provision was overly broad and unenforceable. Because the prohibition in this non-competition provision is not limited to employment that would be in competition with the former employer, the trial court's judgment is affirmed.
Outcome words in this text: affirmed.
Method: an entry is marked with an outcome only when its own text contains the outcome word, and the word is shown beside it. Orders, opinions and judgments whose text does not say are marked Other. Party filings, notices and routine procedural orders (appearances, extra pages, time extensions, scheduling) are not listed. No link between this case and any other case is recorded in our data, so only this case's own record is shown. Open the court's docket
Documents and links