A pathologist and his former employer sued each other over a covenant not to compete provision in the pathologist’s employment contract. Among numerous issues before the Court of Appeals was whether the geographic scope of the non-compete provision was unreasonable. The agreement provided that the pathologist was restricted from being employed by a practice that operates within 50 miles of Dallas County.
The pathologist argued that the scope of his non-compete was overly broad because he only worked in Dallas and Collin counties and because it was actually unlimited in scope since he was restricted from working for any practice that operates in Dallas, even if he worked far from the Dallas area.
The Court rejected those arguments and held that the geographic scope of his non-compete was not unreasonable, noting that the pathologist was also part of his former employer’s management team, causing him to be responsible for pathology practices across the Dallas area. Consequently, the Court reasoned that “even if [the pathologist] were working in New York, for example, his management knowledge of and experience with appellants’ Dallas-area operations would be valuable to his new employer.”