Alliance 3PL Corp. v. New Prime Inc.

Dist. Ct. erred in failing to grant defendant's Rule 50 motion for judgment as matter of law in action alleging that defendant violated back-solicitation clause by obtaining shipping contract from one of plaintiff's clients after defendant had ceased doing business on behalf of plaintiff. No violation of clause occurred where defendant had performed same shipping work for said client prior to time defendant began performing shipping work for plaintiff. Moreover, ordinary meaning of term traffic as contained in clause meant that defendant was precluded from generating shipping business only from plaintiff's clients with whom defendant had no relationship prior to performing services for plaintiff.