re: Non Compete Legal Help

quote:

---

Here are recent examples of reformation:

"The record shows that in reforming Article 25.1 of the operating agreement, the trial court narrowed the geographic range to locations where HMV conducted business activities, removed sentences from the solicitation provision, deleted part of the definition of client and deleted the provision that prohibited Schmidt from being employed by HMV competitors. Although the trial court's revisions were fairly extensive, we cannot say the trial court abused its discretion in deciding to reform Article 25.1 by deleting the overbroad provisions, resulting in an enforceable noncompetition agreement."

Heard, McElroy & Vestal, LLC v. Schmidt, 52,783 (La. App. 2 Cir. 9/25/19), 280 So. 3d 806, 812, reh'g denied (Nov. 14, 2019)

and

By striking the words “and the States of Texas and Mississippi,” the contract is reformed so that it is not overly broad as to geographic limits.

Arthur J. Gallagher Risk Mgmt. Servs., Inc. v. Todd, 2010-41 (La. App. 3 Cir. 6/2/10)

---

Seriously, you need to stop trying to scare this guy. The first case you posted has absolutely nothing to do with this issue he raised. The noncompete in Heard actually specified parishes. The trial court simply severed (pursuant to a severability clause) excess geographic scope for places where the company may want to open business sites in the future.

The second case...same thing. It specified the actual parishes but then also said Texas and Mississippi. The severability clause allowed the court to sever Texas and Mississippi to allow the non-compete to apply to the specific parishes listed.

There is no (still valid) case out there that allows a court to reform a non-compete in Louisiana to add parishes.

Cliffs: If there's no parish(es) listed or identified, it is absolutely null and void.