Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherBrowse by ChannelAbout the NetworkJoin the NetworkProductsSub-MenuProducts OverviewBlog ProBlog PlusBlog PremierMicrositeSyndication PortalsAbout UsContactSubscribeSupport
Book a Demo
Search
Close

Non-Compete Venue Fights

By Rob Radcliff on July 7, 2021
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

A few years ago I addressed venue provisions in employment contracts (see below).  A few additional thoughts –

  • A provision that specifies venue in a particular county, i.e. Dallas County, Texas or city may not always work – while Texas courts will enforce a provision that specifies Texas as the place of venue they won’t necessarily a county or city (there are some exceptions) – So you could have a situation where the dispute is resolved in Texas but not necessarily the forum specified in the contract.
  • There is a venue provision that some courts (it’s complicated) have held that a defendant must be sued in their county of residence when the primary relief sought is injunctive.

Regardless, still include a venue provision that provides for a specific county.

Post From May 2018

Whenever I draft or review an employment agreement (or for that matter any contract) one of the first things I look for is a venue provision.  Usually there is one, but if not you fall back on the laws of the state the party would like to bring suit in to see if venue works.  There is nothing that will take the steam out of a lawsuit then the contention it was filed in the wrong place. Drafting tip – make sure there is a venue provision.

So, assuming there is a venue provision it’s likely there is a choice of law provision as well.  Often times the venue provision will require an employee to agree to venue in the state/city where the employer is located.  The idea from the employer’s standpoint is it would rather enforce its agreements in the place where it is located and in most cases under the same laws.  The provision will look something like this:

Mandatory Venue Provision:  Employee and Company agree that any lawsuit arising from or related to this Agreement shall be filed in the state or federal courts of Dallas County, Texas.  Employee agrees that Employee consents to jurisdiction in the state or federal courts of Dallas County, Texas.

There are a lot of good things about making an ex-employee defend a lawsuit somewhere other than where they reside.  They will have to get a lawyer there and there is the headache of not being at home.  That said, it is also very difficult to push a non-compete case in a place where the employee doesn’t live.  First, off an employer enforcing a non-compete may seek a temporary restraining order.  Assuming the company obtained the TRO in Dallas against an employee that lives in Arizona.  The logistics of serving the former employee in Arizona can be daunting.  This is especially true when the company wants expedited discovery (depositions/documents).  I say all this to underline the concept that venue should be considered in the context of enforcement and how that enforcement will work.

The employer might consider a provision along these lines:

Mandatory Venue Provision:  Employee and Company agree that any lawsuit arising from or related to this Agreement shall be filed in the state or federal courts of Dallas County, Texas or the state or federal courts of the county the Employee resides in at the time this Agreement is executed as set forth below.  Employee agrees that Employee consents to jurisdiction in the state or federal courts of Dallas County, Texas and will not contest the filing of the lawsuit in Dallas, County Texas based on lack of personal jurisdiction.

Something to consider!

Photo of Rob Radcliff Rob Radcliff

Rob represents businesses and individuals in disputes in Texas and throughout the United States. He focuses his practice on employment and commercial matters including issues arising from the arrival and departure of employees.

Read more about Rob RadcliffEmail
  • Posted in:
    Corporate & Commercial, Employment & Labor
  • Blog:
    Smooth Transitions
  • Organization:
    Weinstein Radcliff Pipkin

LexBlog, Inc. logo
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
Real Lawyers
99 Park Row
  • About LexBlog
  • Careers
  • Press
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Editorial Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Service
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Products
  • Blog Pro
  • Blog Plus
  • Blog Premier
  • Microsite
  • Syndication Portals
  • LexBlog Community
  • Resource Center
  • 1-800-913-0988
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
  • Resource Center
  • Blogging 101

New to the Network

  • Tennessee Insurance Litigation Blog
  • Claims & Sustains
  • New Jersey Restraining Order Lawyers
  • New Jersey Gun Lawyers
  • Blog of Reason
Copyright © 2025, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo