Non-competition prohibitions are generally strongly designed in favour of an employer. Ideally, it is best to take steps before signing a non-competition agreement to ensure that it is on a more uniform keel. But even after signing a competition, you may have legal opportunities that can help you practice your chosen profession more freely. American Family, unimpressed or amused by Mr. Graham`s creative efforts, sued him in 2012 for violating the agent`s agreement with the above-mentioned actions. The company also stated that its actions were aimed at encouraging these customers to terminate their insurance policies for the American family. Geographical and permanent factors are relatively simple. A non-compete agreement is unacceptable if it limits the ability of a former employee to work too long in an overly broad field. A non-compete clause prohibiting competition across the country would generally never be reasonable, while a clause prohibiting the work of competitors within a radius of several miles around the employer`s place of activity may be reasonable. Similarly, the Michigan courts did not find a period of competition longer than three years appropriate, but the usual one-year period was considered appropriate. Questions about the applicability of a non-compete agreement in Michigan? Many Michigan employers use competition bans.
A non-competition agreement, which can also be characterized as a non-competition agreement, generally prohibits a worker from working for certain competitors for a certain period after the end of the employment relationship. Michigan currently imposes non-competition agreements, subject to the adequacy requirements mentioned above. However, HB 4874, which is currently in the process of passing Michigan law, would add new restrictions on non-competition prohibitions under Michigan law. There is a reasonable question of fact that depends on the facts of the non-competition clause and the nature of the work to be limited. For example, an agreement prohibiting a medical supply sales agent from competing for one year within 100 miles of its current territory is probably reasonable. The same agreement, which prohibits salespersons from working in a medical sector anywhere in the world for 50 years, is probably not acceptable. For example, in La Checklist Building Services Inc/Krystal Klear Cleaning Services,1 Checklist Building Services Inc. («Checklist») sued two former employees for violating the non-invitation clause in their employment contracts by operating a competing cleaning company. The restriction included a two-year ban, «calls for customer or customer checklists… For the purpose of recruiting or selling disaster recovery services or similar services. However, the former employees argued that they did not require clients from the Disaster Recovery Services Checklist.
On the contrary, they requested routine cleaning services that, according to former employees, did not resemble disaster rehabilitation services. The Economic Court followed this argument and found that catering services and services were different activities. Thus, despite the enforceable force of the non-appeal clause, their language does not apply to the actions of the two former collaborators and they have been able to evade their responsibility. As discussed in previous customer warnings, efforts to prohibit the use of non-competition bans and/or strictly limit the use of competition bans have gained momentum at the federal level, with several states having already passed large-scale laws.