Little Health Law Blog
Our healthcare and business law firm guides many medical practices and physicians through employment matters. A question we are often asked is “is the non-compete enforceable?” That question is never easy to answer, it depends on a mix of law, facts, and practical considerations. Generally speaking, under the Georgia Restrictive Covenant Act, non-competes are enforceable if they are reasonable as to duration, scope, and geographic area. The subject of this post focuses on the question of “scope.” Specifically, Georgia courts have made it clear that a non-compete is unreasonable and overbroad if it prevents an employee from providing “any services” to a competitor or working for a competitor “in any capacity.” This blog post further explains what courts find overbroad about this language. If you need assistance with employment matters or would like to discuss this blog post, you may contact our healthcare and business law firm at (404) 685-1662 (Atlanta) or (706) 722-7886 (Augusta), or by email, info@littlehealthlaw.com. You may also learn more about our law firm by visiting www.littlehealthlaw.com.
In 2022, a District Court from the Southern District of Georgia reviewed a non-compete provision that prevented the employee from working “in any capacity” with a competitor. The District Court found the non-compete unreasonably broad and unenforceable, and stated:
As recently explained by the Georgia Court of Appeals, “[a]lthough O.C.G.A. § 13-8-56(3) states that ‘[t]he scope of competition restricted is measured by the business of the employer[,]’ covenants that do not list specific limits on the type of activity, and effectively bar former employees from working in any capacity for competitors, have been deemed overbroad and unreasonable.” Burbach v. Motorsports of Conyers, LLC, 363 Ga.App. 188, 871 S.E.2d 63, 66-67 (2022) (quoting Carson v. Obor Holding Co., LLC, 318 Ga.App. 645, 734 S.E.2d 477, 483 (2012)).
Our healthcare and business law firm works with numerous medical practices in compliance and regulatory matters. Many medical practices are unaware of the requirements of the Americans With Disabilities Act (“ADA”), and in particular the requirements to accommodate individuals with auditory disabilities (including individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing). The ADA does not just prevent disability discrimination by employers. Title III of the ADA applies to “public accommodations.” A public accommodation is a business that is open to the public or provides goods or services to the public and specifically includes a “professional office of a health care provider.” 28 CFR 36.104; 
Our healthcare and business law firm works with many behavioral health providers in establishing and operating their ABA associated businesses. We have a particular focus on such companies and will be producing a series of helpful articles to assist providers in navigating various operational and business hurdles to ensure they are able to effectively treat their patients.
Our healthcare and business law firm often assists physicians and other providers in employment matters, from reviewing proposed contracts to litigating 
Our healthcare and business law firm often assists physicians and other providers in employment matters, from reviewing proposed contracts to litigating 
Our healthcare and business law firm works with many providers at all stages of employment, including physicians taking their first jobs after training, becoming partners at practices, and selling their practices and retiring. One consistently stressful time for all providers is resigning from a practice. Through our experience, we have learned many tips to assist providers in exiting employment as smoothly as possible. If you have questions regarding this blog post or 
client’s mind when evaluating employment opportunities: “Am I responsible for paying for tail insurance coverage?” As a healthcare and business law firm, we routinely assist physicians in negotiating terms of employment agreements. Through our experience, we have developed tactics for negotiating compromises to the structure of tail insurance coverage agreements, and, herein, we share those tactics.
arisen. 
contracts, it is easy for the entity name to be mistyped, written in an abbreviated or well-known form, or somehow written incorrectly, especially for those individuals operating many similar entities. There is generally no substantial penalty for such an error, however, it can cause unnecessary trouble should a contract dispute arise, including placing the rights, duties, and liabilities under the contract on the individual who signed as the nonexistent entity. This post intends to alert our business readers of this easily avoidable pitfall and provide an overview of how Georgia courts handle such situations.