Recent Developments from Around the States

The Supreme Court of Kansas held on June 3 that restrictive covenants in the employment agreements of four surgeons are enforceable and bar them from practicing in and around Wichita. The court also found that protecting the public interest would not require giving the surgeons the option of paying damages in lieu of complying with the terms of their noncompetition agreements. Idbeis v. Wichita Surgical Specialists, 112 P.3d 81 Kan. June 3).

Wichita Surgical Specialists is organized into five “divisions,” one of which the four physicians were a part of. While other divisions in the medical practice did not require its doctors to enter into restrictive covenants, the one in which the doctors in question worked did. Their noncompetition agremeents included temporal and geographic restrictions, and a liquidated damages or “buyout” clause. Surgeons who introduced a new specialty to their division did not have to enter the restrictive covenant. Dr. Idbeis, a certified general and thoracic surgeon who had practiced in Wichita before joining the surgical group, signed an agreement that included a 2-year noncompetition restriction and a buyout clause. Dr. Rumisek and Dr. Benton also signed agreements restricting them from practicing within the county where the practice was located for 2 years following their departures. Dr. Fleming signed an agreement restricting him from practicing within 75 miles of the Wichita area if he left the surgical group. Unlike Dr. Idbeis' restrictive covenant, the remaining doctors' agreements contained no liquidated damages clause.