• Kristin Huntoon, Jason Stacy, Susie Cioffi, Karin Swartz, Catherine Mazzola, Caleb Profitt, and Owoicho Adogwa.
• Department of Neurological Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio.
• Neurosurgery. 2020 Nov 16; 87 (6): 1085-1090.

BackgroundIn both academic and private practice, noncompete clauses are common in many neurological surgery contracts. Noncompete agreements vary, depending on various factors, including the surgeon's subspecialty, location, and business-related considerations. Each individual state's law on contracts determines the extent to which noncompete clauses are enforceable.ObjectiveTo evaluate the disparate approaches of various states regarding the enforceability of these clauses and their components.MethodsThis review surveys several of the most populous states' law regarding noncompete clauses. This analysis includes an evaluation of state statutes and common law regarding noncompete clauses. It also relies on legal treatises and law review articles.ResultsThe enforceability of the noncompete clause depends on the state in which the physician is employed.ConclusionIt is imperative that individuals understand the content of any noncompete clauses in their contract, as well the climate of the state in which they practice. The state's approach determines whether any part or all of the noncompete agreement is enforceable. A review by the Workforce Committee and the Medico-legal Committee of the Council of State Neurosurgical Societies (CSNS) provides explanation of the common elements in restrictive covenants or noncompete clauses and reviews the enforceability of these clauses.Copyright © 2020 by the Congress of Neurological Surgeons.

8 keywords...

hide…