An Argument for Restricting the Blue Pencil Doctrine

Belmont Law Review, 2019

46 Pages Posted: 17 Apr 2020

Date Written: August 19, 2019

Abstract

The blue pencil doctrine gives courts the authority to either (1) strike unreasonable clauses from a noncompete agreement, leaving the rest to be enforced, or (2) actually modify the agreement to reflect the terms that the parties could have--and probably should have--agreed to. 

In recent years, a number of courts refused to blue pencil noncompetition agreements. In response, some state legislatures responded by passing laws requiring courts to modify unreasonable noncompetition agreements. Legislation mandating the use of the blue pencil, even if well-intentioned, encourages employer overreach. This overreach harms employers, employees, and society as a whole.

Keywords: employment, noncompete, restrictive covenant, noncompetition, blue pencil, equitable modification

JEL Classification: K31, K10

Suggested Citation

Pivateau, Griffin Toronjo, An Argument for Restricting the Blue Pencil Doctrine (August 19, 2019). Belmont Law Review, 2019, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3576169 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3576169

Griffin Toronjo Pivateau (Contact Author)

Oklahoma State University ( email )

Oklahoma State University
Stillwater, OK 74078
United States
405-786-8640 (Phone)

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
61
Abstract Views
1,066
Rank
524,371
PlumX Metrics