The "non-compete" clause is known as a restrictive covenant. It is not the answer to all of your problems. It is a remedy essentially asking the court for an order enjoining someone from competing with you in a particular area for a certain time limitation. It is an equitable remedy of the court. In some states it is called an extraordinary remedy. Restrictive covenants are not looked upon with favor by the courts, and are construed as narrowly as possible to effectuate the desired result because you are attempting to limited the ability of another individual to earn a living. Very often the resulting judgment is significantly less than you wanted. In Connecticut the court will grant the remedy to the extent that the restrictive covenant is reasonable in terms of the scope of its limitation on time, geographical area and activity which is to be restricted. Consequently, if you are actively title searching in 5 out of 50 counties, the court will only restrict competitive title searching with the 5 counties of your marketing area and no others. Likewise the length of time for which you seek restriction may not be excessively long, but rather it must be limited to a reasonable period of time. There is also the nature of the activity to be retstricted. The restrictive covenant would be limited to the activity in which you are engaged. Therefore, it may restrict the defendant from title searching, but would not restrict the defendant from doing witness closings, appraisals or surveys. I recently read a case involving an orthodontist and his employee. The employee signed an employment contract in which he agreed not to practice orthodonture in the same marketing area as his employer for X amount of years. The employee quit his job, and opened his own dentistry practice within the same marketing area as his former employer. The orthodontist sued to enforce the restrictive covenant.The court ruled that the restrictive covenant was reasonable in terms of its length of time and geographical area, but not as to the scope of the activity sought to be restricted. The court enforced the restrictive covenant only to the extent that it related to the practice of orthodonture, but not as to the general practice of dentistry.

Although difficult to enforce, it is still a good idea to have a restrictive covenant in your employment contracts. Sometimes it acts as a deterent to an employee's stealing clients.

Another alternative that you may want to consider is defining your client list as a trade secret within the employment contract. Many states have trade secrets statutes on the books through which you can obtain almost the same result as enforcement of a restrictive covenant.