Jackson Lewis: North Carolina Supreme Court Reiterates Limited Blue Pencil Approach to Overbroad Non-Competes | Practical Law

Jackson Lewis: North Carolina Supreme Court Reiterates Limited Blue Pencil Approach to Overbroad Non-Competes | Practical Law

This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis P.C. addresses Beverage Sys. of the Carolinas, LLC v. Associated Beverage Repair, LLC, in which the North Carolina Supreme Court (NC Supreme Court) held that the state's law does not allow for the judicial reformation of an overbroad non-compete agreement, even if the parties agree to a provision permitting the court to modify the overbroad language. In reversing an appeals court decision, the NC Supreme Court reiterated the state's long-standing adherence to the blue-pencil doctrine, which allows parties to strike, but not rewrite, an overbroad non-compete provision. The NC Supreme Court rejected the parties' reformation clause (which expressly allowed for the rewriting of overbroad restrictions) and stated that the parties may not "contract to give a court power that it does not have."

Jackson Lewis: North Carolina Supreme Court Reiterates Limited Blue Pencil Approach to Overbroad Non-Competes

by Jackson Lewis P.C.
Published on 14 Apr 2016North Carolina, United States
This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis P.C. addresses Beverage Sys. of the Carolinas, LLC v. Associated Beverage Repair, LLC, in which the North Carolina Supreme Court (NC Supreme Court) held that the state's law does not allow for the judicial reformation of an overbroad non-compete agreement, even if the parties agree to a provision permitting the court to modify the overbroad language. In reversing an appeals court decision, the NC Supreme Court reiterated the state's long-standing adherence to the blue-pencil doctrine, which allows parties to strike, but not rewrite, an overbroad non-compete provision. The NC Supreme Court rejected the parties' reformation clause (which expressly allowed for the rewriting of overbroad restrictions) and stated that the parties may not "contract to give a court power that it does not have."