Roquemore Skierski PLLC helps employees, key stakeholders, and business owners review, defend, and enforce non-compete agreements.
Roquemore Skierski PLLC helps employees, key stakeholders, and business owners review, defend, and enforce non-compete agreements.
Unmatched Local Knowledge | 100+ Years of Combined Experience | 24/7 Availability
A non-compete is a contract term that restricts where a person can work, or who a person can work for or with, after a business relationship ends. The most common setting is employment, although similar restrictions can appear in sale-of-business agreements, partnership separations, and equity arrangements. In Fort Worth, non-compete disputes often escalate quickly because the party seeking enforcement may pursue injunctive relief, meaning a court order that restrains certain conduct while the lawsuit proceeds.
Roquemore Skierski PLLC represents business owners, executives, and key employees in non-compete disputes and related restrictive covenant matters. These cases usually turn on a practical set of early questions, including whether the restriction is enforceable, what immediate exposure exists, and what steps reduce the likelihood of emergency court proceedings.
Texas generally permits non-compete agreements, but only when the restriction fits within the Texas Covenants Not to Compete Act. In general terms, enforceability usually turns on whether the non-compete is tied to an otherwise enforceable agreement and whether the contract limits are reasonable in duration, geographic area, and scope of activity. Courts also examine the business interest the restriction is designed to protect, which often includes goodwill, customer relationships, or confidential information.
If the restriction reaches further than necessary to protect that interest, Texas courts may reform the covenant by narrowing it rather than refusing enforcement outright.
When a company decides to enforce a non-compete, the first phase often focuses on temporary relief. A temporary restraining order (TRO) is a short-term order that can be pursued on an accelerated schedule, while a temporary injunction can extend restraints during the case after notice and a hearing. In Tarrant County matters, the quality of the evidence presented early often drives the outcome of that initial relief request.
Enforcing a non-compete agreement commonly relies on:
The signed agreement and related documents, which may include confidentiality terms, non-solicitation provisions, equity materials, and separation or exit documents.
The protectable interest the business claims to be safeguarding, such as customer relationships, goodwill, or confidential processes and information.
The conduct alleged to violate the restriction, supported with dates, communications, customer movement, and other concrete proof that connects the restriction to the challenged activity.
The reasonableness of the time, geography, and activity limits, explained in a way that ties the restraint to a legitimate business purpose rather than general opposition to competition.
When the record supports enforcement, remedies may include targeted court orders, damages where legally available and provable, and early discovery aimed at preserving communications and securing key evidence before it changes.
Non-competes are often enforced with a demand letter or a lawsuit, which requires an immediate assessment of exposure before the dispute expands into broader business disruption. The central issues often include whether the restriction is enforceable, whether the alleged breach can be proven with admissible evidence, and whether temporary court orders could interfere with operations, customer relationships, or a planned transition.
Defense strategies commonly rely on:
The non-compete not being tied to an otherwise enforceable agreement, or the required consideration being missing.
The duration, geographic reach, or scope of restricted activity being broader than Texas law permits for the role and the business footprint.
The employer attempting to use the restriction to suppress competition rather than to protect a legitimate interest.
The asserted confidential information being public, outdated, widely known in the industry, or handled by the employer in a way that undermines confidentiality.
The requested injunction exceeding what the contract language supports or what the evidence can justify.
Because Texas courts may narrow an overbroad restriction, defense strategy often focuses on limiting any temporary order to what is necessary to protect the specific interest at issue while the case is litigated or resolved.
When a business drafts a non-compete, the objective is enforceability and operational clarity. Restrictions are more likely to hold up when the language matches how the business competes, identifies the protectable interest with precision, and aligns with confidentiality and non-solicitation terms that are consistent with internal practices.
Drafting often involves:
Tailoring the restriction length, geographic area, and restricted activities to the business footprint and the individual’s role.
Aligning the non-compete with trade secret and confidentiality rules through clear definitions and consistent handling of sensitive information.
Planning for departures, including return of property, device access, account credentials, and controlled customer communications.
Adding dispute resolution provisions, including forum selection and or arbitration clauses, when the circumstances support those terms.
When an individual is asked to sign a non-compete, review should center on how the restriction applies to the actual role and the realistic next-step opportunities. A non-compete review from Roquemore Skierski PLLC typically covers:
The trigger events, including resignation, termination, a change in role, or separation terms that modify restrictions.
The restricted activities and how the definition of “competition” connects to job duties and the business’s competitive market.
The geographic limits and whether they align with where the business actually operates and where the role touches customers.
Non-solicitation and confidentiality provisions that may function as the real constraint even when the non-compete language appears narrower.
Many non-compete disputes focus on interpretation rather than existence. Interpretation often turns on defined terms, the scope of “competition,” customer and territory definitions, and any carveouts or exceptions that change the practical reach of the restriction.
Interpreting non-compete agreements also requires evaluating how the restriction interacts with other documents. Equity grants, partner or shareholder agreements, separation agreements, and internal policies can expand, narrow, or clarify what the agreement restricts and can materially affect both enforcement and defense strategy.
If you need immediate advice, a fast response to a demand letter, or assistance intepreting a complex non-compete agreement, call Roquemore Skierski PLLC at 972-325-6591. If you are planning an exit, hiring from a competitor, or tightening internal agreements, a Fort Worth non-compete attorney can help you assess enforceability, reduce risk, and put a workable plan in place.
While our business litigation attorneys are based in Downtown Dallas, we proudly serve clients in and around Addison, Carrollton, Cedar Hill, Coppell, DeSoto, Farmers Branch, Flower Mound, Forney, Garland, Grand Prairie, Grapevine, Highland Park, Irving, Oak Cliff, Richardson, Rockwall, Rowlett, Royse City, University Park, and the surrounding area. Whether your company is facing a contract dispute, partnership conflict, or other commercial challenge, we deliver strategic counsel and strong representation across the DFW Metroplex.
