Courts have declined to apply choice-of-law provisions uniformly across state lines. In Centurion Service Group v. Wilensky, Delaware courts refused to enforce a Delaware choice-of-law clause, signaling that contractual forum selection may not resolve conflicts between state regimes. The enforceability of any given noncompete now depends on multiple overlapping factors: where the agreement was signed, where the employee worked, where they relocated, and which states' laws apply—a calculation that varies by jurisdiction and remains unsettled in many contexts.
Multistate employers face immediate compliance exposure. Companies must audit existing noncompete agreements against the laws of every state where employees work or may relocate. Agreements presumed enforceable in Florida may be void in California or Minnesota. The combination of state-level fragmentation and aggressive FTC enforcement targeting low-wage workers and information-scarce industries has made noncompete litigation increasingly unpredictable. Employers should prioritize reviewing choice-of-law provisions and considering whether noncompetes remain a viable retention tool given the regulatory uncertainty.