Non Solicitation Agreement Guidelines

Thank you for providing your location. In Kansas, non-solicitation agreements are generally enforceable if they meet certain criteria. Here are some key points:
- **Reasonableness**: The agreement must be reasonable in scope, duration, and geographic area.
- **Protection of Legitimate Interests**: It must protect legitimate business interests, such as confidential information or customer relationships.
- **Consideration**: There must be adequate consideration for the agreement, meaning the employee must receive something of value in exchange.
Is there a specific aspect of the non-solicitation agreement you need more information about?

In the context of non-solicitation agreements, "customers" generally refer to individuals or entities that have a business relationship with the employer. This can include:
- Clients
- Buyers
- Consumers
- Patients (if applicable)
Would you like more detailed information on what your non-solicitation agreement covers?

To better assist you, could you please clarify what specific details you need regarding what your non-solicitation agreement covers? For instance, are you looking for information on the duration, geographic scope, or specific activities prohibited by the agreement?

In Kansas, the geographic scope of a non-solicitation agreement must be reasonable. Courts often consider factors like:
- **Business Area**: The area where the employer conducts business.
- **Employee's Influence**: Regions where the employee had customer interactions.
- **Competitiveness**: Areas where the employer faces competition.
Would you like more information on how courts determine reasonableness in specific cases?

Courts in Kansas determine the reasonableness of a non-solicitation agreement's geographic scope by evaluating factors like:
- **Business Presence**: Areas where the employer actively operates.
- **Employee's Role**: Regions where the employee has established customer relationships.
- **Market Competition**: Areas where the employer competes.
Would you like examples of cases where geographic scope was deemed reasonable or unreasonable?