Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Non compete clause cannot be enforced under most circumstances in Florida due to right to work laws.
Check your legal requirements. Just because you signed it doesn't make it enforceable.
That's not correct.
With a few exceptions, Florida law does prohibit restraints on trade. One of those exceptions is non-compete agreements that meet the requirements of
Florida Statute 542.335 (this governs non-competes entered into after July 1, 1996 - Florida Statute 542.33 applies to non-competes entered into before then). These requirements can be summarized as follows:
The non-compete must be reasonable in time, area, and line of business.
Legitimate business interests must exist that justify the restrictive covenant.
The non-compete must be reasonably necessary to protect the legitimate business interests.
The statute provides a non-exhaustive list of "legitimate business interests". These include: trade secrets; confidential business information, substantial relationships with specific prospective or existing customers, and extraordinary or specialized training. Typically, trade secrets and other confidential information are claimed as the "legitimate business interests."
Florida’s statute provides some guidance as to whether the duration is "presumptively" reasonable and unreasonable. For instance, in the case of an employment non-compete – less than 6 months is presumptively reasonable and more than 2 years is presumptively unreasonable (may vary depending upon the subsection). Anything in between may, or may not, be reasonable, depending on the facts and circumstances.
There is also a common misperception that there exists a bright-line rule prohibiting an employer from enforcing a restrictive covenant against any employee who has been involuntarily terminated "without cause."
Some case law and commentaries allude to such a bright-line rule, but they are mistaken. A recent case demonstrates the error of this common misperception. In
Morris v. Schroder Capital Management International, 2006 Slip Op. 08638, 2006 WL 3359077 (N.Y. Nov. 21, 2006), the Court of Appeals underscored the notion that a restrictive covenant applicable to a former employee who has been terminated involuntarily and without cause can be subject to the traditional test of whether it is "reasonable," and thus may be enforceable despite the involuntary termination. In short, there is no bright-line rule invalidating restrictive employment covenants in all cases of "without cause" terminations.