This case involved a chiropractor who signed an employment contract with a restrictive covenant not to leave Medical Wellness and practice within 45 miles of the office for two years. He was fired in May and opened up another chiropractic office in July which was 27 miles away from his prior practice. Possibly making matters worse, he began doing a feature on a local radio station that also highlighted his office.

At the close of the case, the court issued an injunction (an order prohibiting him from breaching the non-compete clause) for the two year period. Generally, Pennsylvania courts will enforce employment restrictions when the time period involved is limited and the geographic scope is limited. California, on the other hand, will not enforce any employee covenants not to compete. Note how the judge indicated the last contract was supported by additional consideration (the practice paid an additional $800 toward the chiropractor's medical insurance).

What is your impression of non-compete clauses?

Are they reasonable? Why?