Author Headshot

I'm Attorney Robert Wood. I have handled matters involving Texas non-compete agreements for nearly 30 years. I use this blog to help employers and workers understand the complexities surrounding the enforcement of non-competes. If you have questions, please don’t hesitate to shoot me a message or give me a call at 469-754-2812.

Texas Noncompete Agreements: Not Always Enforceable, Even After Marsh USA

November 9, 2012 / By Robert Wood

Even after the Marsh USA case, some noncompete agreements are still unenforceable in Texas.  In a recent opinion by the Texarkana Court of Appeals, the noncompete agreement stated as follows: 

I agree not to seek employment on a temporary, contract or permanent basis at any company where introduced by Hiring Partners, Inc. for a period of ninety (90) days. I will not seek to induce any client to call other temporary or contract agencies for their temporary, permanent or project assignments. This means that I will not knowingly inform other services of Hiring Partners, Inc. clients and/or rates charged at these client companies. Nor will I discuss my hourly rate with other individuals working for Hiring Partners, Inc. nor other temporary or employment agencies. 
Hiring Partners, Inc. realizes that clients may seek help from other temporary or employment agencies and, that I may also be called upon by another agency to fill other positions; however, I may not accept an assignment through another agency for a period of ninety (90) days at a firm/company that applicant has been introduced to by Hiring Partners, Inc.
Hiring Partners, Inc. reserves the right to replace a candidate working on assignment at its own discretion, without this signed agreement being altered in any way and considers such to remain in effect for a period of ninety (90) days from the date last worked by applicant. 
The court noted that there was no mention of confidential or trade secret information or specialized training in the agreement.  In addition, at trial, the operations manager for the Plaintiff testified that no confidential information was provided to the employees as part of their employment.  
The agreement specified that employment was on an at-will basis.  The court held that employment at will, by itself, is insufficient consideration for a noncompete agreement.   
As this opinion demonstrates, even after the Marsh USA case, employers must ensure that their noncompete agreements so that they are supported by proper consideration.  A mere promise of "at will" employment is not enough. 


1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars
1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5

About the Author

Robert Wood has been a Texas trial lawyer since 1993. During that time, he has represented small, mid-sized, and Fortune 100 companies in business and employment litigation matters all over Texas and the United States. He has also advised and represented hundreds of individuals in employment litigation matters. Read more about Robert Wood