Tag: noncompete agreement

Ohio Court of Appeals Reaffirms a Trial Court’s Power to Modify Noncompete Agreements Ohio's Court of Appeals for the Eighth District affirmed a trial court ruling that modified a non-compete agreement between a hospital and a formerly employed physician. The appeals court found that the trial court was correct in its conclusion that modifying the agreement rather than striking it protected the interest of the hospital. The non-compete agreement in question stated that the physician who worked as the interim director of the hospital's burn center was prohibited from providing services that were similar to the ones he provided at the plaintiff's facility for at least two years after the completion of his employment within 35 miles of the facility. The physician resigned his position at the hospital and accepted a burn ward position within 35 miles of the facility. In response, the hospital sued to seek a preliminary injunction to block the physician from starting work in this position. After holding an evidentiary hearing, the trial court entered an order that modified both the scope and duration of the non-compete clause. First, the court permitted the plaintiff to begin employment at the facility as a surgeon. However, the court enjoined the physician from assuming a role as director for one year, using or disclosing any privileged information acquired from the prior employer, or soliciting former patients for one year. The hospital appealed this order looking to enforce the non-compete agreement as written. The appellate court opted for non-compete agreements to be enforced so long as they are reasonable and extend only as far as is necessary to protect the employer's legitimate interests. The appellate court also noted that courts are empowered to alter these agreements to achieve these results. In determining whether or not the agreement was reasonable, the appellate court judged the legitimate business interest, whether the physician would face undue hardship should the agreement be upheld, and if the agreement would be injurious to the public. In weighing these considerations, the appellate court found that the agreement's term of two years was more restrictive than necessary to protect the employer's interests; however, the hospital did have a legitimate interest in protecting any confidential information. Thus, the appellate court upheld the modified agreement from the trial court. Employer Takeaways The Court of Appeal's decision demonstrates how important it is to judge the scope of non-compete agreements before drafting. Further, this shows that if a court finds the scope of such an agreement unreasonable, it may modify these agreements as it judges necessary. Pre-employ makes background checks easy and reliable. Get in touch with a sales representative today.

Tag: noncompete agreement

Ohio Court of Appeals Reaffirms a Trial Court’s Power to Modify Noncompete Agreements

Our Process

Our Platform

Screenings

For Your Industry

For Your Role

Webinar

Resources Library

Logins

E-Book

Services

Industry

Resources

Our Company