Non-Competition case could be won if I could afford it

[frankdux]

What is the name of your state? New Hampshire

I recently signed a non-compete contract under the threat of termination. I almost immediately realized that it was a huge mistake in that I had cut off many chances for career advancement. The contract has a LOT of problems (i.e. reasons a court would void it) and I have verified this with a couple of lawyers. My main problem though is that I don't doubt I could win against my employer, but that I don't have the same money as a corporation. I have been thinking about taking the offensive and suing to void the contract. The places I could work for won't want to touch me with this contract ( I have put this theory to the test already when I contacted another place). If I begin legal action and my company is stubborn and wants to fight it out to the end I would completely run out of money and not be able to pay my lawyer. I don't make a lot of money and of course if I took this action I would be out of a job. It doesn't seem right that I can't fight for my rights because I don't have the same money as a corporation. Does anyone have any suggestions what I could do? I can provide more details if necessary. Thank you.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

No one is going to litigate this in an internet forum.

So, you either need to come back with specific facts about the contract itself, or an offer of proof of your claims of 'duress'.

 

[frankdux]

Well, I wasn't really asking to have it litigated here. I was asking how can I fight against a corporation with much more money than I have and when I will probably run out of money to pay my lawyer. I am not really in doubt as to whether I would win. If it helps, here are some of the reasons I don't believe the contract would stand up.

1. I was forced to sign the contract long after the inception of employment. I worked for the company for 4 1/2 years and then they sprang it one me. See this article for the problems with doing that in New Hampshire: http://www.sheehan.com/publications.asp?id=1006
2. No compensation at all was given for entering into clause
3. Agreement was signed under duress. For me waking one day to find out you're about to fired and be jobless after 4 1/2 years is extreme duress.
4. Not enough time was allowed for review of contract, I had no time to research my rights
5. Agreement is VERY broad. (I can't back this up unless I posted the contract here which I don't want to do)
6. I was not in sales(I work in the web department), so I had almost no contact with customers/clients and therefore could not steal them
7. No geographical limit is stated
8. The time period is 2 years after being terminated or quitting, which I believe is excessive in an industry where information becomes stale quickly.

 

[cbg]

Why do you have to do anything at all about it now? If you want to leave to go somewhere that's barred by the contract, do it and let them sue you. If your case is as strong as that (and I agree that a two year limit is almost certainly unenforceable) you'll win.

Why make waves where you don't have to?

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Well, I wasn't really asking to have it litigated here. I was asking how can I fight against a corporation with much more money than I have and when I will probably run out of money to pay my lawyer. I am not really in doubt as to whether I would win. If it helps, here are some of the reasons I don't believe the contract would stand up.

o.k.

1. I was forced to sign the contract long after the inception of employment. I worked for the company for 4 1/2 years and then they sprang it one me. See this article for the problems with doing that in New Hampshire: http://www.sheehan.com/publications.asp?id=1006

Unless you were specifically threatened in some manner (loss of job or physical harm) and have witnesses, this is a non-issue.

2. No compensation at all was given for entering into clause

none is required under law.

3. Agreement was signed under duress. For me waking one day to find out you're about to fired and be jobless after 4 1/2 years is extreme duress.

not the legal definition of duress.

4. Not enough time was allowed for review of contract, I had no time to research my rights

Again, unless you were forced to sign it (by physical restraint or threats) you had every right to take the agreement home to read, read it on your lunch break or simply not sign.

5. Agreement is VERY broad. (I can't back this up unless I posted the contract here which I don't want to do)

And that is simply a question of fact for a judge/jury to decide.

6. I was not in sales(I work in the web department), so I had almost no contact with customers/clients and therefore could not steal them

Irrelevant

7. No geographical limit is stated

None has to be stated under law.

8. The time period is 2 years after being terminated or quitting, which I believe is excessive in an industry where information becomes stale quickly.

what you believe and the particular circumstances of each individual non-compete contract are again, a question of fact for a judge/jury.

 

[frankdux]

Well I guess I'll ask my question again in less words. It seems my original question got lost in evaluating the merits of my contract sitation. So my question is this.....HOW IS THE ORDINARY MAN SUPPOSED TO CHALLENGE AN UNFAIR NON-COMPETE WHEN HE FACES $20,000 IN LEGAL FEES? NO PROBLEM FOR A CORPORATION BUT PRETTY HOPELESS FOR AN INDIVIDUAL WITH A SALARY OF $35K PER YEAR AND LOADS OF BILLS.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Well I guess I'll ask my question again in less words. It seems my original question got lost in evaluating the merits of my contract sitation. So my question is this.....HOW IS THE ORDINARY MAN SUPPOSED TO CHALLENGE AN UNFAIR NON-COMPETE WHEN HE FACES $20,000 IN LEGAL FEES? NO PROBLEM FOR A CORPORATION BUT PRETTY HOPELESS FOR AN INDIVIDUAL WITH A SALARY OF $35K PER YEAR AND LOADS OF BILLS.

This is a personal issue. This website is for legal opinion and advice. You have been given valid legal advice and opinion.

 

[panzertanker]

Well I guess I'll ask my question again in less words. It seems my original question got lost in evaluating the merits of my contract sitation. So my question is this.....HOW IS THE ORDINARY MAN SUPPOSED TO CHALLENGE AN UNFAIR NON-COMPETE WHEN HE FACES $20,000 IN LEGAL FEES? NO PROBLEM FOR A CORPORATION BUT PRETTY HOPELESS FOR AN INDIVIDUAL WITH A SALARY OF $35K PER YEAR AND LOADS OF BILLS.

You were given valid legal advice. If you are not actively trying to leave the company, this conversation is moot.