You can request a review of your non-compete agreement from Matthew Piccolo, a licensed Nevada lawyer, by submitting your information on the link below. The cost of a consultation is $149, which involves reviewing your agreement and answering the questions you have about it and your current situation. Although the rules against geographical restrictions on competition restrictions may be outdated or “desperately obsolete” in this digital age (see Accelerated Care Plus Corp. v. Diversicare Mgmt. Servs. Co., No. 3:11-CV-00585-RCJ (D. Nev. August 22, 2011), the Nevada Supreme Court recently upheld its rule that non-competition obligations are subject to a “high degree of control” and are applicable only if they are geographically “limited to areas where the employer has established contact with customers and goodwill.” See Landon Shore v. Global Experience Specialists, Inc., 134 Nev. Adv. Op.
61 (August 2, 2018). Finally, this act responds to The Golden Road Motor Inn, Inc. v. Islam, in which the Nevada Supreme Court rejected the “blue pencil” doctrine and ruled that state courts could not change non-competition bans. Prior to this Act, if a non-competition agreement contained even a provision that “goes beyond what is necessary to protect the interests of the employer,” then the whole agreement was unenforceable. However, even with this precedent of change, the Nevada Supreme Court has not always chosen to amend the agreements. The court would amend out-of-competition agreements in some scenarios and render them unreasonable, without amendments (and therefore invalid) in others.7 For example, in Jones v. Deeter, despite Hansen`s citation, the court made no change and found a five-year term “inadequate and therefore unenforceable.” 8 It was only with the 2016 Nevada Supreme Court decision at Golden Road Motor Inn, Inc. Islam9 that the court drew a clear (albeit more controversial) line about when a change is appropriate.
All provisions of a non-compete agreement that violate this new law are deemed to be undying and unenforceable. NRS 613.195 (1). If the agreement fails in one way or another, it is “inconclusive and unenforceable.” The rest of this article describes what makes it possible to enforce a non-compete agreement and how the courts write non-competition prohibitions. We look forward to assisting you in your non-competition agreement. As you can see, the competition prohibitions act is complex and often vague. We have not provided specific legal advice here, but a basic summary of the law, which varies according to the circumstances of a person and the agreements you have signed with your employer. Under the new law, a non-compete agreement must be reached in Nevada: the agreement with the employer, argued that the court could and should have changed any extended duration of the agreement. In particular, dissent established that non-competition prohibitions should be taken with blue pencils in order to limit employment only as casino hostesses and not as another type of job with a competitor. Dissent has argued that a majority of states allow this type of blue pencil to implement the intent of the parties. The majority disagreed and stated that language, if clear, is the intention of the parties.
It criticized the approach of dissent and stated that the blue pencils created the possibility of flouting the contractual intent of the parties and created an agreement to which the parties do not really agree.