Q In the case Davis v. Mason, a court considered an early non-compete agreement. Did the court in that case reach a proper conclusion? What should courts say in similar cases in modern times?
In the case of Davis v. Mason, it can be viewed that the rigid rules of common law actually does not lay emphasis upon the fact that the husband should have a real seizing of the lands of his wife to enroll himself to a tenancy by curtesy in the waste or what can be sometimes called as “Wild Lands”. The court in context to the scenario, completely refused to deliver separate instruction which they actually prayed for also including a bill of exception that was being tendered upon the case which was brought forward to this court of law ("Davis v. Mason, 26 U.S. 503 (1828)", 2018).
