Non-compete question

[Vincentgrimes]

Minnesota

I’ve recently just left a large 3rd party logistics company where I worked as a acct executive/broker, and now getting hired onto another logistics company as a fleet supervisor. Previous role and new role aren’t the same, but same industry being both are logistics. Just got informed via email from previous employer that I had a non compete in place. They do not know where or what company I’m moving to.

Minnesota just passed into law banning non-competes as of July 21st of this year, but I signed my non compete a year ago. From what I’m finding in my research, that law only protects new employees starting on that date or after and not before. Am I doomed to make a living now in the industry for the 1year cool off period even if my roles are different within?

Im supposed start in two weeks, now I’m stressed! Any feed back would be very much appreciated!

 

[quincy]

Minnesota

I’ve recently just left a large 3rd party logistics company where I worked as a acct executive/broker, and now getting hired onto another logistics company as a fleet supervisor. Previous role and new role aren’t the same, but same industry being both are logistics. Just got informed via email from previous employer that I had a non compete in place. They do not know where or what company I’m moving to.

Minnesota just passed into law banning non-competes as of July 21st of this year, but I signed my non compete a year ago. From what I’m finding in my research, that law only protects new employees starting on that date or after and not before. Am I doomed to make a living now in the industry for the 1year cool off period even if my roles are different within?

Im supposed start in two weeks, now I’m stressed! Any feed back would be very much appreciated!

First, here is a link to the new law:

https://casetext.com/statute/minnesota-statutes/labor-industry/chapter-181-employment/workplace-communications/section-181988-covenants-not-to-compete-void-in-employment-agreements-substantive-protections-of-minnesota-law-apply

You will need to have your non-compete agreement personally reviewed by an employment lawyer in Minnesota to determine if there are any conditions in your specific agreement that are enforceable. Your former employer will not want to sue to enforce the noncompete agreement unless he is confident the terms of the agreement will withstand a challenge. Should your former employer lose the suit, he can be held liable for paying all of your legal fees in addition to his own.

You are not doomed to living out your life in a field unrelated to your area of expertise. Noncompetes must be limited by geographic reach and by time.

 

[Vincentgrimes]

Thanks fo

First, here is a link to the new law:

https://casetext.com/statute/minnesota-statutes/labor-industry/chapter-181-employment/workplace-communications/section-181988-covenants-not-to-compete-void-in-employment-agreements-substantive-protections-of-minnesota-law-apply

You will need to have your non-compete agreement personally reviewed by an employment lawyer in Minnesota to determine if there are any conditions in your specific agreement that are enforceable. Your former employer will not want to sue to enforce the noncompete agreement unless he is confident the terms of the agreement will withstand a challenge. Should your former employer lose the suit, he can be held liable for paying all of your legal fees in addition to his own.

You are not doomed to living out your life in a field unrelated to your area of expertise. Noncompetes must be limited by geographic reach and by time.

r thanks for the input. The non-compete basically states anything that has to do with logistics and anywhere in the United States, as they’re nationwide and with offices within 2/3rds of the U.S. isn’t this overkill??

 

[Zigner]

If the FTC is successful, non-competes will be banned (even those signed in the past). This is still a ways off, though.

 

[Zigner]

Thanks fo

r thanks for the input. The non-compete basically states anything that has to do with logistics and anywhere in the United States, as they’re nationwide and with offices within 2/3rds of the U.S. isn’t this overkill??

There is no way that anyone can intelligently answer based on your interpretation of what the contract "basically" states. You will want to have your agreement reviewed by a local employment law attorney.

 

[Vincentgrimes]

There is no way that anyone can intelligently answer based on your interpretation of what the contract "basically" states. You will want to have your agreement reviewed by a local employment law attorney.

This was taken from the non compete signed. —-defined as “any person, firm, corporation, or entity that is engaged in shipping, third-party logistics, freight brokerage, truck brokerage or supply chain management services in the Continental United States” for one year after leaving

 

[Zigner]

This was taken from the non compete signed. —-defined as “any person, firm, corporation, or entity that is engaged in shipping, third-party logistics, freight brokerage, truck brokerage or supply chain management services in the Continental United States” for one year after leaving

You will want to have your agreement reviewed by a local employment law attorney.

 

[quincy]

This was taken from the non compete signed. —-defined as “any person, firm, corporation, or entity that is engaged in shipping, third-party logistics, freight brokerage, truck brokerage or supply chain management services in the Continental United States” for one year after leaving

Offhand I would say the brief excerpt you provided from your noncompete agreement would be an unenforceable condition however the agreement needs to be read in its entirety to determine if it is enforceable. Both the breadth of the geographical restrictions and the one-year time frame are legally questionable.

Have the agreement personally reviewed by an attorney in your area.

 

[Vincentgrimes]

Appreciate all the feedback. Hope this isn’t enforceable, as I’m not maliciously stealing clients, soliciting them or stealing any proprietary information. I’m just trying to move on and get into a less stressful role in management. Will probably start seeking out some free consultation or low flat fee attorneys

 

[Zigner]

Please understand that attorneys don't generally work for free. While it's true that you may find an attorney (or, perhaps, a student under the supervision of an attorney) who may be willing to give a quick answer for free, it's far more likely that you will have to pay something. Everyone deserves to be paid for the work they do.

 

[quincy]

Appreciate all the feedback. Hope this isn’t enforceable, as I’m not maliciously stealing clients, soliciting them or stealing any proprietary information. I’m just trying to move on and get into a less stressful role in management. Will probably start seeking out some free consultation or low flat fee attorneys

I think you are smart to start seeking out an attorney in your area for a personal review of the agreement you signed. There could be provisions in the agreement that are enforceable as written and a court in Minnesota can enforce those provisions while at the same time striking out (editing, modifying, blue penciling) those provisions that exceed reasonable limits.

I agree with Zigner that you should expect to pay for the review.

 

[zddoodah]

Am I doomed to make a living now in the industry for the 1year cool off period even if my roles are different within?

Well...it's worth pointing out that it's not possible to speak intelligently about the legal effect of a document I haven't read (the small bit you quoted out of context doesn't help, IMO).

With that said, based on the first couple results of my google search for "minnesota non-compete law" (both of which were articles penned by leading law firms), it appears the new law doesn't apply to any agreement made prior to July 1, 2023.

 

[quincy]

Well...it's worth pointing out that it's not possible to speak intelligently about the legal effect of a document I haven't read (the small bit you quoted out of context doesn't help, IMO).

With that said, based on the first couple results of my google search for "minnesota non-compete law" (both of which were articles penned by leading law firms), it appears the new law doesn't apply to any agreement made prior to July 1, 2023.

The law is not retroactive. True.

However the courts in Minnesota allow for judges to blue-pencil contracts to make them compatible with the law. A noncompete agreement that contains conditions of the sort quoted by Vincentgrimes (e.g., in effect for one year/restrictions that apply to entire US) would appear to be unenforceable in pretty much every US state and would likely to be struck from the agreement. Enforceable under those conditions potentially could be trade secret/confidential information provisions.

 

[bcr229]

If the FTC is successful, non-competes will be banned (even those signed in the past). This is still a ways off, though.

Expected in 2024. Not in time for the OP unfortunately.
https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/federal-register-notices/non-compete-clause-rulemaking

 

[Litigator22]

* * * a court in Minnesota can enforce those provisions while at the same time striking out (editing, modifying, blue penciling) those provisions that exceed reasonable limits.

I see where you came upon the blurb that Minnesota courts are empowered to modify and reform a covenant not to compete in order to render its consequences less restrictive. But it is an absolute irresponsible, unsupportable fallacy!

Rhetorical asking - why did the founding fathers include the clause declaring it unconstitutional for any state to pass laws "impairing the Obligation of contract"? Clearly, for the purpose of ensuring transactional stability.

For the same reason it is a long-recognized maxim of American Jurisprudence that our courts (whose conduct falls within the meaning of laws passed) do NOT have the right or ability to substitute their judgment for that of the contracting parties. They are obligated to treat the contract as written rather than rewriting it.

They may at times refuse to enforce the writing such as deeming it unconscionable, one of adhesion, calling for illegal conduct, against established public policy, etc., etc.,

Or, when uncertainly occurs due to patent ambiguity, they can, if necessary, admit extrinsic evidence to learn the true intent of the parties. But again, when clear and unambiguously stated, they lack the ability to reallocate, increase or lessen risks, burdens, or benefits.

Now, if needed or requested I am prepared to post a host of supporting case law contradicting your twice reference to an absurd misstatement of law suggesting that the application of established principals of law give way to individual caprice and fancy.