What is a “legitimate employer interest” in a non-compete agreement? To be applicable under Minnesota law, a non-compete agreement must serve the legitimate interest of employers. Minnesota courts have recognized three types of legitimate employer interests: (1) the protection of employer`s confidential information and/or trade secrets; (2) the protection of the employer`s value and relationships; and (3) specialized training. Confidential Information and Business Secrets As a general rule, a non-compete agreement must contain an appropriate geographic restriction to be applicable under Minnesota law. It is difficult to predict the type of geographic perimeter that is considered appropriate; depends on the nature of the employer`s business, the location of its customers and where the worker provided his services. If .B the non-competition agreement, in its own words, lasts three (3) years, the court could justify the agreement with a blue pencil by reducing the duration of the restrictions to one (1) year. Similarly, if the non-compete agreement prohibits the employee from competing anywhere in the state of Minnesota, the court could clear the agreement by prohibiting employees from competitions in the Twin Cities metropolitan area, but allowed competition outside Minneapolis and St. Paul. If the non-compete agreement prohibits the worker from working for a competitor in the sector, the court could make the agreement with a blue pencil allowing the worker to keep a job with a competitor as long as the employee does not call the former employer`s clients. These are just examples. “I told them my patients wouldn`t be crows,” Jensen says. “You didn`t hesitate. I thought it was unfair.
I was always ready to go with the non-account. I just thought it was on the roads, not on the way the birds fly. In the Hampton case, the applicant argued, and the Tribunal accepted that just because there is an employment contract between the parties at one time does not mean that there is an employment contract that the court must apply Hunt`s holding on a request for dismissal, since the main right to payment of shares under the post-closing agreement exists, even though the decision of the right may depend on the interpretation of the contract. The court stated that it was “too early to determine whether the plaintiff asserted a viable right to a violation of good faith and fair trade, because the enterprise agreement is not an employment contract. Home – Article – Validity of Non-Competition Agreements in Minnesota Courts will review employer restrictions in the agreement to determine whether they are narrow enough to protect those interests. If the provisions are too broad, i.e. they must restrict an area that is too large a geographical area or the worker must be unemployed for a long period of time, they may be repressed. There is often a balance test that the court must take into account between the rights and interests of the worker and the employer. Second, Minnesota courts will consider whether non-competition prohibitions protect a legitimate commercial interest. A non-compete clause applies when it is necessary to protect the business or the employer`s value and is not broader to protect those interests.