Remember that simply because it could invalidate or amend a clause in a non-competition agreement, a court does not necessarily render the whole agreement unenforceable. On the contrary, the courts in Kansas and Missouri will try to tighten competition rather than eliminate it altogether. Talk to a lawyer. If you understand your obligations at the front of an agreement, whether you are an employee or an employer, you can save thousands of dollars along the way. We advise you to consult with our non-compete lawyers in Kansas City before moving forward. Please contact Mike Pospisil (816.895.9105) or Matt Swift (816.895.9107) to discuss your specific situation. The courts in Missouri and Kansas do not have a “Bright Line” rule for a reasonable right. The courts examine the specific terms of each agreement and examine the conditions related to the role and history of the worker with his former employer. See Osage Glass, Inc. v.
Donovan, 693 S.W.2d 71, 74 n. 2 (Mo. bench 1985) (application of a non-compete agreement prohibiting a business leader from working for a competitor in Missouri for a period of three years); Alltype Fire Protection Co. v. Mayfield, 88 S.W.3d 120, 123-24 (Mo. App. 2002) (application of a two-year non-competition agreement over a 100-mile radius against a customer service employee); Mid-States Paint – Chem. Co., 746 S.W.2d at 617 (application of a non-compete agreement against a seller, which was amended by the court for a period of two years within a 125-mile radius); Orchard Container Corp. Orchard, 601 S.W.2d 299, 304 (Mo. App.
1980) (application of a non-compete agreement against a former 125-mile company president and a three-year period). Most non-competition prohibitions are enforceable in Kansas courts, and courts generally do not even deal with such cases. Only if one or more of the following measures are taken will the non-competition clause be repealed, as Digital Ally, Inc. points out against Daniel Corum: how many states Kansas does not have a general applicability status to restrictive alliances, but the courts will allow and enforce such restrictions to the extent that they protect a legitimate commercial interest. In this regard, the Court found that Servi-Tech`s investment in specialized agronomy consulting and training services for Olson, as well as Olson`s development of customer and customer relations, constituted legitimate business interests that warranted appropriate competition and non-appeal requirements. In a recent decision on Kansas` non-compete ban, the United States District Court for the District of Kansas partially acceded to a company`s request to ensure that its former employee does not violate the non-compete clauses and non-compete clauses of its employment contract. The decision in Servi Tech, Inc. /. Olson points to a number of key issues that Kansas employers should consider when making restrictive agreements. If you have a non-competitive or unsolicted restriction, lawyer Tara Swartz can help you understand what your limitations are and whether they apply.