This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Labor/Employment

Jan. 6, 2004

Even Narrower Noncompete Covenant May Be Void

Focus Column - Employment Law - By David H. Raizman and Kaye E. Chaffee - Courts repeatedly have interpreted California's prohibition on covenants not to compete as a ban against all forms of such covenants, subject to narrow statutory exceptions. See, for example, Hill Med. Corp. v. Wycoff , 86 Cal.App.4th 895 (2001) ("[Business and Professions Code] Section 16600 presently sets out the general rule in California - covenants not to compete are void.").

        Focus Column
        
        Employment Law
        
        ...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Already a subscriber?

Sign up for Daily Journal emails