To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
On December 31, 2020, the Nevada Supreme Court issued an opinion addressing and clarifying several issues relating to the power of the court to reform or modify an unreasonable noncompetition agreement often referred to as blue penciling.
In
Duong v. Fielden Hanson Isaacs Miyada Robison Yeh, Ltd., 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 87 (2020), the employer sought to enjoin two anesthesiologists from breaching noncompetition agreements. After the employer merged with another company in 2016, the anesthesiologists entered into employment contracts that contained a noncompetition provision restricting the anesthesiologists from working at several facilities. The agreement also contained language requesting that, if any provision of the agreement is found unreasonable by a court, “any such provision shall nevertheless be enforceable to the extent such court shall deem reasonable, and, in such event, it is the parties’ intention . . .
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
On December 31, 2020, the Nevada Supreme Court issued an opinion
addressing and clarifying several issues relating to the power of
the court to reform or modify an unreasonable noncompetition
agreement often referred to as blue penciling.
In
Duong v. Fielden Hanson Isaacs Miyada Robison Yeh,
Ltd., 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 87 (2020), the employer sought to
enjoin two anesthesiologists from breaching noncompetition
agreements. After the employer merged with another company in
2016, the anesthesiologists entered into employment contracts that
contained a noncompetition provision restricting the
anesthesiologists from working at several facilities. The