Under Ohio law, noncompetition contracts are generally enforceable if they are reasonable.
Covenants not to compete are frequently enforced where the former employer's "confidential information" may be used or disclosed unless the employee is restrained from competing.
California law bars covenants not to compete in nearly all circumstances. In Edwards v. Arthur Anderson, the California Supreme Court determined that the law should be read strictly, and not only void the ?unreasonable? noncompete clause, but all noncompete clauses other than those explicitly allowed in the code.
California law bars covenants not to compete in nearly all circumstances.
Specificity: A non-compete agreement must be specific about the activities it prohibits. Additionally, the covenant must clearly articulate what activities are considered competing and those activities must be substantially similar or related to the work the employee performed for the employer.
The agreement is not enforceable because the time period it covers is too long. The period considered reasonable varies by state but typically ranges from 6 months to two years. Longer agreements will likely be found invalid. The territory covered by the agreement is too large.
Although governed by individual state laws, common factors include whether the employer has a legitimate interest to protect; whether the geographic scope prevents the worker from making a living; the length of restriction; whether the agreement prevents workers from doing different work from what they are doing; and ...