SLO: (805) 546-8785 | Paso Robles: (805) 226-4148


California Court of Appeal Questions Validity of Employee Nonsolicitation Agreements

November 2018


Employee non-solicitation agreements are designed to prevent current and former employees of a business from soliciting the business’s customers or employees for the purposes of competing in the same type of business. Non-solicitation agreements are sometimes included as a condition of employment, often memorialized at the time hire by way of a confidentiality or non-disclosure agreement, or a proprietary information and invention agreement. Non-solicitation agreements may also be included at the end of the employment relationship, generally in a severance or termination agreement.

Notwithstanding wide adoption and an arguably very compelling interest of the business, the state of California takes a strong stance against employee non-solicitation agreements and places a very high premium employee mobility and the right to work, and are now potentially unenforceable by law if drafted so broadly that it prevents the employee from practicing in their chosen profession, essentially becoming an impermissible non-competition agreement. Business and Professions Code § 16600 (“BPC”) provides that “every contract by which anyone is restrained from engaging in a lawful profession, trade, or business of any kind is to that extent void.” The general prohibition on the validity and enforceability of nonsolicitation agreements has very few legislative exceptions. [1]

Despite prior case law allowing certain employee non-solicitation agreements in “narrow” and “reasonable” circumstances, a recent decision by the California Court of Appeal on November 1, 2018 calls into question the validity of any type of employee non-solicitation agreement under any circumstances. This significant legal development is a good reminder for employers to review their employee agreements regularly with counsel. We have drafted this summary of the case and state of the law, as well as some best practices, for employers when making a determination about whether to include or enforce employee non-solicitation agreements in the employment context.

The Case

In AMN Healthcare, Inc. v. Aya Healthcare Services, Inc., 2018 Cal. App. LEXIS 998 (Nov. 1, 2018) (“AMN Healthcare”), the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District affirmed the trial court’s ruling invalidating AMN’s non-solicitation provision in its Confidentiality and Non-Disclosure Agreements (“CNDA”). Significantly, this decision also prevented AMN from enforcing or attempting to enforce the employee non-solicitation provision in its CNDA with any of its former employees.

The case involved two competing businesses, AMN and Aya. Both companies are in the business of providing nurses to healthcare facilities on a temporary basis. Both companies rely on internal recruiters to locate and place these “traveling nurses” into healthcare facilities for thirteen-week assignments. As a condition of employment, AMN required its nurses to sign a CNDA prohibiting them, for at least one year after their employment, from soliciting any AMN employees to leave AMN. In this case, some recruiters left AMN to work for Aya, where they proceeded to recruit AMN nurses in contravention of the signed CNDA.

AMN sued Aya and the recruiters individually, for breach of the CNDA. AMN also argued that the identity of its employees was confidential information, and a trade secret, which Aya employees improperly used in its recruiting of AMN nurses. As to the breach of contract claim, Aya and the recruiters successfully argued that the employee non-solicitation provision in the CNDA was void under BPC § 16600. The Court, in reaching its decision, reasoned that because the recruiters were in the business of recruiting, any restriction on their ability to conduct those activities would be a restraint on their right to engage in their chosen profession, thus violating BPC § 16600. Following the California Supreme Courts rationale in Edwards v. Arthur Andersen LLP, (2008) 44 Cal.4th 937, the Court of Appeals went on to express doubt as to whether any employee non-solicitation agreement, in any context, would satisfy the requirements of BPC § 16600, despite some prior case law to the contrary.[2] With respect to the trade secret argument, the Court did not find it persuasive, as the identity of employees does not constitute a protectable trade secret.

What you need to know

  • In nearly all circumstances, a restrictive covenant limiting an employee’s ability to engage in his or her chosen profession will not pass muster under BPC § 16600.  
  • A violation of BPC § 16600 may also violate California’s Unfair Practices Act by engaging in unlawful business practices.
  • A business should not depend upon employee non-solicitation agreements as a contractual vehicle to prevent the disclosure of trade secrets.  
  • Employment agreements, non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements, severance agreements, employee handbooks and any other employment related contracts may be voidable if an unenforceable non-solicitation provision is contained within the document.

Costs of Non-Compliance

Apart from the organizational distraction, likely harm to corporate culture and potential negative impact on employee retention are concerns for a violation of BPC § 16600. Additionally, a violation would render the offending provision or agreement unenforceable. Furthermore, a clause that is void under BPC § 16600 may also violate California’s Unfair Practices Act (BPC § 17200 et seq.), providing for both monetary damages as well as injunctive relief. Most notably in AMN Healthcare, the Court awarded Aya $190,000.00 in attorney’s fees and costs because, as the court concluded, “the instant action involved an important issue affecting the public interest.”[3]

Best Practices

  • Employers should not assume that post-employment restrictions on employee solicitation are lawful.
  • Employers should undertake a careful review of all employment agreements, employee handbooks, non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements, and other employment documents, and modify them based on the ruling in AMN Healthcare.
  • If seeking to enforce a non-solicitation agreement or provision, seek legal advice from experienced counsel before proceeding with any enforcement activity.

The attorneys at Carmel & Naccasha have extensive experience advising our business clients on matters involving compliance with California’s rapidly changing employment laws. Please contact us if you have any questions or need assistance in ensuring your business is protected.

[1] See Business and Professions Code §§ 16600 et seq..

[2] See Loral Corp. v. Moyes (1985) 174 Cal. App. 3d 268 (upholding the validity of a contractual clause restricting a former executive from “raiding” the plaintiff’s employees).

[3] AMN Healthcare, at 44.

Read More
Two Trainings offered by Carmel & Naccasha

Heather Whitham of Carmel & Naccasha will be offering two upcoming training sessions for District Directors, Trustees and designated staff.

Thursday, January 31, 2019
9:30-11:30 at the Templeton Community Center/Women’s Club
601 S. Main Street, Templeton
Ethics training is mandatory under Assembly Bill 1234. Topics to be covered include:
-Personal Financial Gain by Public Servants;
-Conflict of Interest, Bribery and Nepotism ;
-Gift, Travel and Mass-Mailing Restrictions;
-Honoraria, Financial Interest Disclosure and Competitive Bidding;
-Prohibitions on the Use of Public Resources for Personal or Political Purposes.

Thursday, February 28, 2019
9:30-11:30 at the Templeton Community Center/Women’s Club
601 S. Main Street, Templeton
Sexual Harassment Prevention Training
Sexual Harassment Prevention Training is mandatory for elected officials and key staff per Assembly Bill 1661. Topics covered will include:
-Federal and State statutes prohibiting sexual harassment;
-The remedies available to victims of sexual harassment;
-Practical examples to instruct the official in the prevention of sexual harassment, discrimination and retaliation.

Cost of either program is $50, pre-registration is mandatory. Certificates of completion will be issued to participants at the conclusion of the workshop.

Please contact Laurie Ion at Temple CSD to register. 805-434-4900 or

Read More
Carmel & Naccasha sponsor Cal Poly CIE event.
Entrepreneurship in the Rise of New Media

Carmel & Naccasha was proud to be the event sponsor for a panel discussion at the Cal Poly Center for Innovation & Entrepreneurship (CIE) titled Get Connected: Entrepreneurship in the Rise of New Media.

The panel was moderated by Jonathan York, Interim Executive Director and Co-founder of the Cal Poly CIE.

Read More
C&N at PRWCA event

Had a great time with our friends out at the Paso Robles Wine Country Alliance luncheon. The Alliance has made vast strides in promoting Paso Robles wine country; last year they focused efforts in Texas and next year they are focusing on Florida. Encompassing 614,000 acres, Paso Robles American Viticultural Area (AVA) is recognized and respected as one of the great wine regions of the world, and continues to affect all aspects of our community. For some wine country fun, look out for their upcoming events linked here

Read More
Another Carmel & Naccasha Win

The local San Luis Obispo paper, The Tribune, featured a nice write up on a recent case handled by Mike McMahon and our litigation team.

Read the article here.

Read More
Helping Jack’s Helping Hand

Helping Jack's Helping Hand

Helping Jack’s Helping Hand

Carmel & Naccasha’s own Ziyad Naccasha (second from left) enjoyed a round of golf for a great cause, Jack’s Helping Hand. Thanks Geri LaChance of SESLOC for the opportunity to participate.

Read More
Paso Rotary Winemakers’ Cookoff

We are happy to once again be a sponsor of the Paso Robles Rotary Winemakers’ Cookoff. This is a really fun event and should be on your calendar every year.

The Paso Robles Rotary brings top winemakers together to compete to see who is the best chef.

The 18th Annual Winemakers’ Cookoff will be held Aug. 13, 2016, from 6-9 p.m. at the Paso Robles Event Center. See their website for tickets and more information.

And we’ll see you there!

Read More
To Offer Sabbaticals or Not to Offer Sabbaticals… And if I Do, Should I Pay?

A Tale of Two Tricky (and Sometimes Dangerous) Dilemmas

Recently, I gave a webinar on establishing eligibility and procedures for taking sabbaticals and unpaid leaves of absence through Lorman Education Services. I thought some of the information I discussed might be of interest to our clients in the San Luis Obispo area, many of whom are cutting edge technology companies. This blog post will focus on sabbaticals, which are gaining popularity as companies struggle to recruit and retain talented, top-notch employees.

Read More
Talley Fun Run

Members of the Carmel & Naccasha team started their Sunday morning with a run through the Talley Vineyards at the 23rd Annual Marianne Talley Fun Run. We had a great time and can’t wait to see you there next year. Thanks to the Talley Family for being such great hosts.

Read More
Privacy Policies: Are You in Compliance?

My previous post was regarding cybersecurity and some of the dangers lurking behind our widely-used “secure” technologies and authentication systems. A related issue is what you, as a business owner, chief technology officer or other data collector, must do to advise customers and other users of your website of your privacy policies and procedures – in short, how are you going to protect their identities, credit card information and other personal data you collect? This post will address what is legally required of you if you collect any sort of data, as well as the question of whether you need to implement Terms and Conditions. Hint: the answer is yes!

Read More