4 ms·
IANAL, of course, but I read that non-competes can be enforced in California if they were valid where they were signed. In other words, you can't nullify a non
by geebee 15y ago
IANAL, of course, but I read that non-competes can be enforced in California if they were valid where they were signed. In other words, you can't nullify a non-compete by moving to California.
Sorry about the no cite on that, I think it was from a Time magazine article a few years ago.
- hga 15y agoTo my memory, this is not true. California says "they're null and void within our borders and that's that". Rather like slavery, come to think of it, the big issue of the status of a slave who escaped to a free state. Dred Scott is not considered to be one of the finer moments in US Supreme Court history. Are you sure you're not remembering a case that falls under the exceptions to California law?
- geebee 15y agowell, I should have researched this better before mouthing off about it. Looks like you're right. http://lawzilla.com/content/noncompete.shtml http://lawzilla.com/content/noncompete.shtml "Who wins often depends upon a race to the courthouse. For multi-state employers it is often a rush to the courthouse to determine if a non-compete agreement is valid. The employer's strategy is to get an order outside of California in their favor. The employee or California prospective employer's strategy is to get an order within California in their favor. In the face of dueling, and opposing orders, the first to the courthouse may win because states often must give effect to orders from other courts." The article I recall probably was about someone in california who was bound by a non-compete, but it wasn't the california courts that did it? Anyway, my lack of expertise is really showing here, so I should probably stop. All I really wanted to say is yeah, I had that wrong.