SearchEmployment & Labor Law

Non-Compete Enforceability Analysis

Non-compete enforceability by state, answered person by person: each restrictive clause read, each employee matched to the law where they work, and each ruling cited.

Watch it work Book a walkthrough

Open the map and follow one void clause to the memo ↓

Watch with transcript →

The problem

The same covenant is void for one account manager and binding for the next

A client with people in many states sends its form agreements and asks which ones hold. The answer depends on where each person works, what they earn, whether they are exempt and when they signed. An associate reads each agreement, looks up the work state and checks a chart that was current last spring.

Pay floors move every January and new laws arrive mid-year, so the chart drifts while the memo is still in draft. The costly mistakes come late: a demand letter sent to someone the covenant never bound, a notice the law required and nobody sent, a whole state that turns void on a date the client did not plan for.

Built forEmployment partnersEmployment associatesTrade secrets partnersIn-house counsel

The Problem Today

With the national rule gone, each state's own law decides, so one clause holds in one state and fails in the next.

30M: workers bound by a non-compete, about 1 in 5 published
150+: state bills on non-competes in about three years published

Checked one file at a time

Agreements
Work states
Pay floors
Case law

Floors change every JanuaryA chart reviewed once a year is stale by spring
Letters that backfireA penalty per worker for enforcing an unlawful non-compete

The Solution

Every clause pulled, citedNon-competes, non-solicits and choice of law from each version
Each person matchedWork state, exempt status and this year's pay floor, per employee
Ruled with the citeVoid, reform or holds for each clause, citing the statute or case
Narrowest form, acceptedEach failing clause rewritten to the narrowest lawful form, then signed

Built-in controls

Nothing reaches an employee unsigned
Each ruling cites a statute or case
Pay data masked in every output

What You Get

Counsel answers the client per person, with a cited ruling and a lawful rewrite behind each dot on the map.

24 hours: of associate time for 412 agreements, from about 220 our estimate

The law on a future dateSee who falls out when floors rise or a ban arrives
Notices the law requiresOverdue letters drafted and held for counsel to approve
Departures checked firstKnow a covenant holds before any demand letter goes out

Nine screens, one matter

Non-compete enforceability by state, worked out for each of 386 employees

Forms, census, law, map, rewrites, memo: each screen below names who uses it and what it takes off their desk.

01Agreements and versions
Every version of the form laid side by side, clause type by clause type
How it works
- Six versions as columns, the restrictive clause types as rows
- Each cell holds the clause as written, cited to its section
- 2,184 clauses pulled from 412 agreements
- A chip under each cell says where it is void or narrowed
AssociateEnds the hunt through ten years of forms for where each version put its non-compete, tolling and choice of law.
02Employees by state
Each employee matched to the state they work in, pay set against its floor
How it works
- The census joined to the agreements: work state, role, exempt status and 2026 pay
- A tick on each pay bar marks that state's 2026 floor
- Filtered to void, each row gives its reason in a few words
- A work state it cannot confirm goes to a person
AssociateSees at once which people sit under a non-compete salary threshold or signed after a ban, without matching payroll to agreements line by line.
03State rules, with the cite
State rules, each with its cite, pay floor, longest term and notice duty
How it works
- 31 rules, each carrying its statute or case and the date it took effect
- Pay floor, longest term allowed, notice duty and what happens if it fails
- A strip of the changes that move this client's answers
- A rule change applies only after the employment partner approves it
Employment partnerReplaces a chart that went stale between reviews with dated, cited rules that change only when the partner approves.
04Enforceability map
One dot per employee, colored by the ruling where that person works
How it works
- 386 employees plotted in their work state
- Each state shaded as a ban, limited by pay or terms, or enforceable with reform
- 38 void, 97 to reform and 277 holding as written, of 412 agreements
- A state's panel gives its rule, its cite, the clauses held there and the next step
Employment partnerAnswers the client's question, which of these hold, by person and with the cite, on one screen.
05Map as of a future law date
A law-date switch that redraws the map for rules not yet in force
How it works
- Today, Jan 1, 2027 or Jun 30, 2027, one click each
- On the later date a statewide ban turns all 24 agreements in one state void
- The tally moves to 61 void, 76 to reform and 275 holding
Employment partnerShows the client who falls out before a floor rises or a ban arrives, so releases and rewrites are planned ahead of the date.
06Clause rewrite
A void non-compete redrawn as the narrowest non-solicit that state allows
How it works
- The clause as signed beside the narrowest lawful form, struck and added words marked
- Fresh pay for current employees: $1,500 each, $21,000 in all, for the client to decide
- Accept for all, edit, or drop with a reason
Employment partnerKeeps the protection the law still allows for 14 account managers, where the choice was a covenant a court strikes or none.
07Required notices
Required notices drafted and held for counsel to approve
How it works
- Letters for 9 current employees and 4 former employees
- The deadline has passed, so they go now as a late cure
- Each names the agreement, its date and the clauses that no longer bind
- Counsel approves; the client sends
Employment partnerTurns a notice duty the client missed into letters ready to approve, each telling the employee in plain words what still binds them.
08Enforcement candidates
Recent departures, each with the ruling where the person worked
How it works
- Departures in the last 90 days to a competitor
- Each card shows the covenant, the ruling, the evidence and the agent's view
- The view reads worth a letter, a reformed claim, or do not send a demand
- The agent lists facts; the partner decides
Trade secrets partnerKnows the covenant holds where the person worked before a demand letter goes out, and sees which departures would invite a fee claim instead.
09Signed enforceability memo
A memo where each figure links back to the map, the rule or the clause
How it works
- The answer first: 38 void, 97 to reform, 277 enforceable as written
- Where the risk is, state by state, then what to do
- Before signing: 412 of 412 rulings cited and reviewed
- Only the employment partner can sign; nothing leaves before it
Employment partnerSigns on day 9 of the matter a memo that can be checked figure by figure, where the same work done manually runs about 6 weeks.

Around the matter

Source passages, state panels and the record behind each ruling

More of the matter, from one clause's source text to the settings practice support keeps.

Source passage of a non-compete clause opened over the agreement grid, with twenty-four months, the business scope and the territory highlighted — **The clause at its section**Any cell shows its source text on a click, with the term, the reach and the restricted business marked.

State panel for an enforceable-with-reform state: 6 non-competes to narrow, the non-solicit and confidentiality clauses holding, and the cited rule — **A state that reforms**30 employees and 32 agreements: 0 void, 6 to reform, 26 holding. Courts there must narrow an overbroad covenant, so the step is a rewrite.

Non-compete salary threshold preview for Jan 1, 2027: one state shows 2 void, 8 to reform and 40 holding once its pay floor rises to $80,000 — **Next year's pay floor**Once one state's floor rises to $80,000 on Jan 1, 2027, 2 employees fall below it: 40 void across the client, up from 38.

Rewrite marked accepted by counsel for all 14 agreements, the redline and the fresh-pay figures above it, and 1 of 31 states accepted — **Accepted for all 14**Counsel accepts the converted clause for the whole group, and the tally of states accepted moves to 1 of 31.

Matter log with 12 events, from the upload and the clause reading through the rulings to the accepted rewrite and the signed memo — **Each ruling and signature, logged**Each read, match, ruling, approval and signature on the matter, by agent or by person, kept 7 years after it closes.

Matter settings: 31 states in scope, rewrite and notice switches, who prepares and who signs, sources and retention — **Scope, roles and retention**States in scope, the law date, the yearly floor refresh, who may sign, and pay data used only to apply floors and masked in outputs.

The same 412 agreements, ruled under the law on three dates

One switch on the map re-rules each agreement for a date ahead. The holds barely move; the void count does.

Law as of	Void	Reform	Holds
Today	38	97	277
Jan 1, 2027: one state's pay floor rises to $80,000	40	97	275
Jun 30, 2027: a statewide ban takes effect	61	76	275

Thirteen overdue notices, and two people about to drop below a pay floor

Four things in one census that a form-by-form review walks past.

Two salaries just under next year's floor

Paid $76,200 and $78,900, two employees hold today and fall below the $80,000 floor that applies from Jan 1, 2027.

Notices owed and never sent

The law required letters telling 9 current and 4 former employees their covenants were void. The deadline passed, so the drafter prepares 13 letters as a late cure.

A choice-of-law clause the employee can undo

In 14 agreements, clause 9.3 picks another state's law and courts. Where these people work, the employee may void that clause and recover fees, so the rewrite brings both home.

Three departures where a demand would backfire

Of 6 people who left in the last 90 days, 2 merit a letter and 1 a reformed claim. For the other 3, a demand would backfire: one state charges $5,000 plus fees, and the other two let the employee recover fees.

Agents on the matter

Agents pull, match and rule; a partner decides whether anyone is sued

Six of them share the matter, and every close call on a covenant goes to counsel.

Clause extractor

Pulls each non-compete, non-solicit, no-hire, confidentiality, choice-of-law, tolling and forfeiture clause from each version, cited to its section.

Never edits the agreement text
The associate spot-checks clauses in each version

Workforce matcher

Matches each employee to their agreement and to the law of their work state, with exempt status and this year's pay against the floor.

Never guesses a work state; unclear ones go to a person

State law tracker

Keeps each state's rule, pay floor, length cap, notice and reform rule with its cite and effective date, and watches for change.

Never applies a rule without a cite and an effective date
Each rule change waits for the partner

Enforceability ruler

Rules each clause for each employee as void, reform or holds, with the statute or case it relies on.

Never rules on a clause it cannot cite
Never decides close calls alone

Narrowest-form drafter

Rewrites each failing clause to the narrowest form the state allows, or recommends dropping it, and drafts the notices the law requires.

Never widens a clause
Never sends anything

Departure scout

Lists recent departures to competitors with the covenant, the ruling where the person worked and the evidence on file.

Never recommends suit
Never contacts anyone

Non-compete enforceability by state, question by question

What is non-compete enforceability by state?

Non-compete enforceability by state is whether a restrictive covenant holds under the law of the state where the employee works. This solution answers it for each employee: it reads each clause in each version of the client's forms, matches each person to their work state and pay, and rules void, reform or holds, with the statute or case cited.

How does it keep up with pay floors that change every January?

The state law tracker holds each floor with the date it takes effect and proposes each change; it applies once the employment partner approves. The law-date switch on the map shows who falls below a floor about to rise.

What happens to a covenant in states that ban non-competes?

The non-compete is ruled void for each employee there. The drafter rewrites it to the narrowest protection the state still allows, often a non-solicit of accounts the person served, or recommends dropping it. For current employees it proposes fresh consideration for the client to decide, and it drafts any notice the law requires.

Does it decide whether to enforce against someone who left?

No. The departure scout lists each recent departure with the covenant, the ruling where the person worked and the evidence. The trade secrets partner decides whether a letter goes.

What reaches the client and its employees, and when?

Nothing leaves before the employment partner accepts, edits or drops each rewrite and signs the memo. Amendment packets and notices then wait for the client's general counsel to approve the rollout.

How is the client's pay data handled?

Pay is used only to apply each state's floor and is masked in outputs, and none of the client's records train a model. Each read, ruling, edit and signature is logged.

Employment & Labor Law

A covenant that binds in one state
and fails one border over.

Send a past client's census and its form agreements, then set our rulings beside your own memo, state by state.

Book a walkthrough Browse solutions

Non-Compete Enforceability Analysis

The same covenant is void for one account manager and binding for the next

The Problem Today

The Solution

What You Get

Non-compete enforceability by state, worked out for each of 386 employees

Every version of the form laid side by side, clause type by clause type

Each employee matched to the state they work in, pay set against its floor

State rules, each with its cite, pay floor, longest term and notice duty

One dot per employee, colored by the ruling where that person works

A law-date switch that redraws the map for rules not yet in force

A void non-compete redrawn as the narrowest non-solicit that state allows

Required notices drafted and held for counsel to approve

Recent departures, each with the ruling where the person worked

A memo where each figure links back to the map, the rule or the clause