{ "type": "practice-guide", "canonical": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas", "links": [ { "rel": "self", "href": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas.json", "type": "application/json" }, { "rel": "alternate", "href": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas", "type": "text/html" }, { "rel": "alternate", "href": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas/markdown", "type": "text/markdown" }, { "rel": "alternate", "href": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas/json", "type": "application/json" } ], "data": { "topic": "non-compete", "state": "arkansas", "frontmatter": { "title": "Non-Competes in Arkansas", "description": "Arkansas non-compete law under Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101, enacted by Act 921 of 2015, includes mandatory reformation, continued-employment consideration, a two-year presumption, a physician ban, and judicial tolling risk.", "state": "Arkansas", "lastReviewed": "2026-06-02", "license": "CC BY 4.0", "authors": [ "steven-obiajulu" ], "summary": { "enforceability": "reasonable", "bottomLine": "Arkansas enforces an employee non-compete that is ancillary, protects a statutory business interest, and is no broader in time and scope than necessary, with overbroad covenants reformed by the court.", "keyLaw": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 (Act 921 of 2015; amended by Act 232 of 2025)", "exceptions": "Physician practice restrictions void (§ 4-75-101(k), 2025); Title 17 Subtitle 3 licensees excluded; non-solicits/NDAs excluded", "courtNarrowing": "rewrite", "appliesToContractors": "unclear", "extendedForBreach": "Open question — prospective injunctions allowed, contractual tolling unsettled", "maxLength": "2 years presumptively reasonable", "noticeRequirement": "None", "incomeThreshold": "None", "saleOfBusiness": "Judged under common-law reasonableness, with less scrutiny than an employment covenant", "customerNonSolicit": "Excluded from non-compete statute", "employeeNonSolicit": "Excluded from non-compete statute" }, "about": [ "Arkansas non-compete agreements", "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "Arkansas restrictive covenants", "Arkansas non-compete reasonableness test", "Arkansas blue pencil non-compete", "Arkansas physician non-compete ban", "Arkansas non-solicitation agreements", "Arkansas trade secrets" ], "translations": [ { "language": "中文", "status": "planned" }, { "language": "Español", "status": "planned" }, { "language": "Português", "status": "planned" }, { "language": "Deutsch", "status": "planned" } ], "relatedForm": { "slug": "openagreements-restrictive-covenant-arkansas" } }, "questions": [ { "slug": "employee-non-compete-enforceability", "label": "Are employee non-competes enforceable?", "heading": "Are employee non-compete agreements enforceable in Arkansas?", "answerText": "Yes, if the covenant is ancillary to employment, protects a statutory business interest, and is no broader in time and scope than necessary to defend that interest.", "sources": [ { "id": "q1-aca-enforceable", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(a).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports enforceability for an employment non-compete that is ancillary to employment, backed by a protectable business interest, and limited as to time and scope.", "verbatimQuote": "A covenant not to compete agreement is enforceable if the agreement is ancillary to an employment relationship or part of an otherwise enforceable employment agreement or contract to the extent that: (1) The employer has a protectable business interest; and (2) The covenant not to compete agreement is limited with respect to time and scope in a manner that is not greater than necessary to defend the protectable business interest of the employer.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q1-aca-enforceable" }, { "id": "q1-aca-protectable", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(b).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports the statutory list of protectable business interests, including trade secrets, customer lists, goodwill, confidential information, training, and other valuable employer data.", "verbatimQuote": "For the purposes of subsection (a) of this section, the protectable business interest of the employer includes the employer's: (1) Trade secrets; (2) Intellectual property; (3) Customer lists; (4) Goodwill with customers; (5) Knowledge of his or her business practices; (6) Methods; (7) Profit margins; (8) Costs; (9) Other confidential business information that is confidential, proprietary, and increases in value from not being known by a competitor; (10) Training and education of the employer's employees; and (11) Other valuable employer data that the employer has provided to an employee that an employer would reasonably seek to protect or safeguard from a competitor in the interest of fairness.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q1-aca-protectable" }, { "id": "q1-aca-reformation", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(f).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports mandatory reformation and enforcement of a covered overbroad covenant under reformed terms.", "verbatimQuote": "The court shall enforce the covenant not to compete agreement under the reformed terms and conditions.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q1-aca-reformation" }, { "id": "q1-box-effective-date", "authorityType": "case-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Box v. J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc.", "citation": "Box v. J.B. Hunt Transp., Inc., 2017 Ark. App. 605, 533 S.W.3d 603.", "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4441363/box-v-jb-hunt-transport-inc/", "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4441363/box-v-jb-hunt-transport-inc/#:~:text=Arkansas%20Code%20Annotated%20section%204%2D75%2D101,of%20Act%20921%20of%202015.", "proposition": "Box supports the Act 921 effective-date framing for distinguishing agreements governed by the statute from agreements predating the Act.", "verbatimQuote": "Arkansas Code Annotated section 4-75-101 (Supp. 2015), which became effective on July 22, 2015, pursuant to the enactment of Act 921 of 2015.", "date": "2017-11-08", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q1-box-effective-date" } ] }, { "slug": "reasonableness-test", "label": "What makes a non-compete reasonable?", "heading": "What makes an Arkansas non-compete reasonable or enforceable?", "answerText": "The covenant must be tied to a protectable business interest and limited in time and scope no more than necessary to defend that interest.", "sources": [ { "id": "q2-aca-enforceable", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(a).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports the core Arkansas reasonableness test for employment non-competes.", "verbatimQuote": "The covenant not to compete agreement is limited with respect to time and scope in a manner that is not greater than necessary to defend the protectable business interest of the employer.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q2-aca-enforceable" }, { "id": "q2-aca-protectable", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(b).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports the statutory categories of protectable business interests.", "verbatimQuote": "For the purposes of subsection (a) of this section, the protectable business interest of the employer includes the employer's: (1) Trade secrets; (2) Intellectual property; (3) Customer lists; (4) Goodwill with customers; (5) Knowledge of his or her business practices; (6) Methods; (7) Profit margins; (8) Costs; (9) Other confidential business information that is confidential, proprietary, and increases in value from not being known by a competitor; (10) Training and education of the employer's employees; and (11) Other valuable employer data that the employer has provided to an employee that an employer would reasonably seek to protect or safeguard from a competitor in the interest of fairness.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q2-aca-protectable" }, { "id": "q2-aca-factors", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(c).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports the statutory reasonableness factors for assessing a covenant without a specific geographic limit.", "verbatimQuote": "The reasonableness of a covenant not to compete agreement shall be determined after considering: (A) The nature of the employer's protectable business interest; (B) The geographic scope of the employer's business and whether or not a geographic limitation is feasible under the circumstances; (C) Whether or not the restriction placed on the employee is limited to a specific group of customers or other individuals or entities associated with the employer's business; and (D) The nature of the employer's business.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q2-aca-factors" }, { "id": "q2-mercy-no-ordinary-competition", "authorityType": "case-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Mercy Health Sys. of Nw. Ark., Inc. v. Bicak", "citation": "Mercy Health Sys. of Nw. Ark., Inc. v. Bicak, 2011 Ark. App. 341, 383 S.W.3d 869.", "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5283436/mercy-health-system-of-northwest-arkansas-inc-v-bicak/", "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5283436/mercy-health-system-of-northwest-arkansas-inc-v-bicak/#:~:text=Unless%20the%20covenantee%20has%20a,would%20merely%20prohibit%20ordinary%20competition.", "proposition": "Mercy supports the pre-Act Arkansas rule that a covenant cannot be used merely to prohibit ordinary competition.", "verbatimQuote": "Unless the covenantee has a legitimate interest to be protected by the agreement, the law will not enforce such a contract, as this would merely prohibit ordinary competition.", "date": "2011-05-11", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q2-mercy-no-ordinary-competition" } ] }, { "slug": "geographic-limit", "label": "Does Arkansas require geography?", "heading": "Does an Arkansas non-compete need a geographic limit?", "answerText": "Not always. The current statute says the lack of a specific or defined geographic restriction does not make a covenant overbroad if the restraint is otherwise reasonable as to time and scope.", "sources": [ { "id": "q3-aca-no-geography", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(c).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports the rule that lack of a specific geographic restriction does not itself make an otherwise reasonable covenant overbroad.", "verbatimQuote": "The lack of a specific or defined geographic descriptive restriction in a covenant not to compete agreement does not make the covenant not to compete agreement overly broad under subdivision (a)(2) of this section if the covenant not to compete agreement is limited with respect to time and scope in a manner that is not greater than necessary to defend the protectable business interest of the employer.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q3-aca-no-geography" }, { "id": "q3-aca-factors", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(c).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports considering business geography, feasible geographic limits, customer or entity scope, and the nature of the business.", "verbatimQuote": "The reasonableness of a covenant not to compete agreement shall be determined after considering: (A) The nature of the employer's protectable business interest; (B) The geographic scope of the employer's business and whether or not a geographic limitation is feasible under the circumstances; (C) Whether or not the restriction placed on the employee is limited to a specific group of customers or other individuals or entities associated with the employer's business; and (D) The nature of the employer's business.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q3-aca-factors" }, { "id": "q3-bendinger-geography", "authorityType": "case-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Bendinger v. Marshalltown Trowel Co.", "citation": "Bendinger v. Marshalltown Trowel Co., 338 Ark. 410, 994 S.W.2d 468 (1999).", "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2454655/bendinger-v-marshalltown-trowell-co/", "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2454655/bendinger-v-marshalltown-trowell-co/#:~:text=We%20hold%20that%20the%20failure,this%20case%20renders%20it%20overbroad.", "proposition": "Bendinger supports the pre-Act common-law geography problem for an overbroad employee covenant lacking an adequate limiting feature.", "verbatimQuote": "We hold that the failure of the covenant to contain a geographic restriction in this case renders it overbroad.", "date": "1999-07-15", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q3-bendinger-geography" }, { "id": "q3-nanomech-geography", "authorityType": "case-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "NanoMech, Inc. v. Suresh", "citation": "NanoMech, Inc. v. Suresh, 777 F.3d 1020 (8th Cir. 2015).", "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2777573/nanomech-inc-v-arunya-suresh/", "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2777573/nanomech-inc-v-arunya-suresh/#:~:text=Under%20Arkansas%20law%2C%20a%20noncompete,court%20may%20not%20narrow%20it.", "proposition": "NanoMech supports the pre-Act federal application of Arkansas law invalidating a no-geography, any-capacity covenant.", "verbatimQuote": "Under Arkansas law, a noncompete agreement must be valid as written; a court may not narrow it.", "date": "2015-02-06", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q3-nanomech-geography" } ] }, { "slug": "duration-limits", "label": "How long can it last?", "heading": "How long can an Arkansas non-compete last?", "answerText": "Two years is presumptively reasonable under the statute, unless the particular facts clearly show that two years is unreasonable compared with the employer's protectable interest.", "sources": [ { "id": "q4-aca-two-years", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(d).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports the two-year presumption and its case-specific exception.", "verbatimQuote": "A post-termination restriction of two (2) years is presumptively reasonable as to length of time under subdivision (a)(2) of this section unless the facts and circumstances of a particular case clearly demonstrate that two (2) years is unreasonable compared to the employer's protectable business interest.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q4-aca-two-years" }, { "id": "q4-bud-duration", "authorityType": "case-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Bud Anderson Heating & Cooling, Inc. v. Neil", "citation": "Bud Anderson Heating & Cooling, Inc. v. Neil, 2018 Ark. App. 183, 545 S.W.3d 819.", "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6241502/bud-anderson-heating-cooling-inc-v-mike-neil-absolute-hvac-llc/", "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6241502/bud-anderson-heating-cooling-inc-v-mike-neil-absolute-hvac-llc/#:~:text=%5BW%5Dhile%20the%20courts%20have%20upheld,years%20were%20unreasonable%20and%20invalid.", "proposition": "Bud Anderson supports the Arkansas appellate discussion that historically one- and two-year limits had been upheld while three- and five-year limits had been unreasonable or invalid.", "verbatimQuote": "[W]hile the courts have upheld time limits of one year and two years, restrictions of three years and five years were unreasonable and invalid.", "date": "2018-03-07", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q4-bud-duration" } ] }, { "slug": "court-narrowing", "label": "Will a court reform it?", "heading": "Will an Arkansas court reform an overbroad non-compete?", "answerText": "Yes, for a covered employment non-compete under § 4-75-101. If the restrictions are unreasonable, the court must reform the covenant as needed and enforce it under the reformed terms.", "sources": [ { "id": "q5-aca-reformation", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(f).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports mandatory judicial reformation of an overbroad covered employment covenant to reasonable limits.", "verbatimQuote": "If restrictions in a covenant not to compete agreement are found to be unreasonable and impose a greater restraint than is necessary to protect the protectable business interest of the employer under subdivision (a)(1) of this section, the court shall reform the covenant not to compete agreement to the extent necessary to: (A) Cause the limitations contained in the covenant not to compete agreement to be reasonable; and (B) Impose a restraint that is not greater than necessary to protect the protectable business interest.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q5-aca-reformation" }, { "id": "q5-aca-reformation-enforce", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(f).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports enforcement under the reformed covenant terms.", "verbatimQuote": "The court shall enforce the covenant not to compete agreement under the reformed terms and conditions.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q5-aca-reformation-enforce" }, { "id": "q5-bendinger-no-rewrite", "authorityType": "case-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Bendinger v. Marshalltown Trowel Co.", "citation": "Bendinger v. Marshalltown Trowel Co., 338 Ark. 410, 994 S.W.2d 468 (1999).", "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2454655/bendinger-v-marshalltown-trowell-co/", "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2454655/bendinger-v-marshalltown-trowell-co/#:~:text=The%20court%20has%20held%20that,it%20might%20be%20considered%20reasonable.", "proposition": "Bendinger supports the pre-Act Arkansas rule that a restrictive covenant had to be valid as written and would not be rewritten by the court.", "verbatimQuote": "The court has held that the contract must be valid as written, and the court will not apportion or enforce a contract to the extent that it might be considered reasonable.", "date": "1999-07-15", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q5-bendinger-no-rewrite" }, { "id": "q5-nanomech-no-narrow", "authorityType": "case-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "NanoMech, Inc. v. Suresh", "citation": "NanoMech, Inc. v. Suresh, 777 F.3d 1020 (8th Cir. 2015).", "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2777573/nanomech-inc-v-arunya-suresh/", "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2777573/nanomech-inc-v-arunya-suresh/#:~:text=Under%20Arkansas%20law%2C%20a%20noncompete,court%20may%20not%20narrow%20it.", "proposition": "NanoMech supports the Eighth Circuit's pre-Act reading that Arkansas courts could not narrow an overbroad non-compete.", "verbatimQuote": "Under Arkansas law, a noncompete agreement must be valid as written; a court may not narrow it.", "date": "2015-02-06", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q5-nanomech-no-narrow" }, { "id": "q5-box-effective-date", "authorityType": "case-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Box v. J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc.", "citation": "Box v. J.B. Hunt Transp., Inc., 2017 Ark. App. 605, 533 S.W.3d 603.", "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4441363/box-v-jb-hunt-transport-inc/", "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4441363/box-v-jb-hunt-transport-inc/#:~:text=However%2C%20in%20the%20present%20case,after%20Act%20921%20became%20effective.", "proposition": "Box supports treating Act 921 as the effective-date line between pre-Act agreements and post-Act statutory treatment.", "verbatimQuote": "However, in the present case the statutory law arguably applies only to the parties’ third restricted stock agreement executed in October 2015 after Act 921 became effective.", "date": "2017-11-08", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q5-box-effective-date" } ] }, { "slug": "consideration", "label": "What consideration is required?", "heading": "Is continued employment enough consideration for an Arkansas non-compete?", "answerText": "Yes. The statute says continued employment is sufficient consideration for a covenant not to compete.", "sources": [ { "id": "q6-aca-consideration", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(g).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports continued employment as sufficient consideration for an Arkansas employment non-compete.", "verbatimQuote": "An employee's continued employment is sufficient consideration for a covenant not to compete agreement.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q6-aca-consideration" }, { "id": "q6-aca-enforceable", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(a).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports the separate statutory enforceability requirements of protectable interest and reasonable time and scope.", "verbatimQuote": "The employer has a protectable business interest; and (2) The covenant not to compete agreement is limited with respect to time and scope in a manner that is not greater than necessary to defend the protectable business interest of the employer.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q6-aca-enforceable" } ] }, { "slug": "physicians-professionals", "label": "What rules apply to physicians?", "heading": "Are physician and professional non-competes enforceable in Arkansas?", "answerText": "Physician practice restrictions are void under the current statute, and § 4-75-101 otherwise does not apply to covered Title 17 professional licensees except for that physician rule.", "sources": [ { "id": "q7-aca-physician-void", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(k).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports the statutory rule voiding a physician non-compete that restricts the physician's right to practice within scope.", "verbatimQuote": "A covenant not to compete agreement that restricts the right of a physician to practice within the physician's scope of practice is void.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q7-aca-physician-void" }, { "id": "q7-aca-title-17", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(j).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports the carve-out for professional licensees under Arkansas Code Title 17, Subtitle 3, except as provided by the physician rule.", "verbatimQuote": "Except as provided under subsection (k) of this section, this section shall not: (1) Be read to impair, limit, or change a party's protections and rights under the Arkansas Trade Secrets Act, § 4-75-601 et seq.; or (2) Apply to a person holding a professional license under Arkansas Code Title 17, Subtitle 3.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q7-aca-title-17" }, { "id": "q7-aca-physician-definition", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(k).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports the statutory definition of physician for the physician non-compete ban.", "verbatimQuote": "As used in subdivision (k)(1) of this section, \"physician\" means a person authorized or licensed to practice medicine under the Arkansas Medical Practices Act, § 17-95-201 et seq., § 17-95-301 et seq., and § 17-95-401 et seq., and a person authorized to practice osteopathy under § 17-91-101 et seq.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q7-aca-physician-definition" }, { "id": "q7-mercy-public-policy", "authorityType": "case-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Mercy Health Sys. of Nw. Ark., Inc. v. Bicak", "citation": "Mercy Health Sys. of Nw. Ark., Inc. v. Bicak, 2011 Ark. App. 341, 383 S.W.3d 869.", "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5283436/mercy-health-system-of-northwest-arkansas-inc-v-bicak/", "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5283436/mercy-health-system-of-northwest-arkansas-inc-v-bicak/#:~:text=Covenants%20not%20to%20compete%20are,the%20physicians%20of%20their%20choice.", "proposition": "Mercy supports the pre-2025 Arkansas public-policy concern with unduly restricting patient access to physicians.", "verbatimQuote": "Covenants not to compete are not looked upon with favor by the law; in fact, it is contrary to public policy to unduly restrict the [spublic’s right of access to the physicians of their choice.", "date": "2011-05-11", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q7-mercy-public-policy" }, { "id": "q7-mercy-affirm", "authorityType": "case-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Mercy Health Sys. of Nw. Ark., Inc. v. Bicak", "citation": "Mercy Health Sys. of Nw. Ark., Inc. v. Bicak, 2011 Ark. App. 341, 383 S.W.3d 869.", "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5283436/mercy-health-system-of-northwest-arkansas-inc-v-bicak/", "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5283436/mercy-health-system-of-northwest-arkansas-inc-v-bicak/#:~:text=The%20circuit%20court%20did%20not,ability%20to%20earn%20a%20living.", "proposition": "Mercy supports affirmance of summary judgment against enforcement of the physician covenant on the pre-Act record.", "verbatimQuote": "The circuit court did not err in granting partial summary judgment to Dr. Bicak on the eovenant-not-to-compete claim because Mercy did not counter the evidence demonstrating that it had no interest sufficient to warrant its enforcement; that it was designed only to eliminate competition; and that it would unreasonably interfere with the public’s right of access to the physicians of their choice and Dr. Bicak’s ability to earn a living.", "date": "2011-05-11", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q7-mercy-affirm" } ] }, { "slug": "extended-for-breach", "label": "Does the period toll?", "heading": "Does an Arkansas non-compete period toll or extend during breach or litigation?", "answerText": "Sometimes by equitable injunction, but drafted contractual tolling clauses remain an open question. Bud Anderson treated a prospective injunction beyond the nominal one-year period as legally possible, while § 4-75-101 does not expressly validate tolling-on-breach clauses.", "sources": [ { "id": "q8-bud-prospective", "authorityType": "case-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Bud Anderson Heating & Cooling, Inc. v. Neil", "citation": "Bud Anderson Heating & Cooling, Inc. v. Neil, 2018 Ark. App. 183, 545 S.W.3d 819.", "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6241502/bud-anderson-heating-cooling-inc-v-mike-neil-absolute-hvac-llc/", "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6241502/bud-anderson-heating-cooling-inc-v-mike-neil-absolute-hvac-llc/#:~:text=Therefore%2C%20it%20is%20not%20clear,appeal%2C%20a%20one%2Dyear%20prospective%20injunction.", "proposition": "Bud Anderson supports the availability question for a prospective injunction running beyond the contract's nominal one-year post-employment period in the non-compete injunction posture.", "verbatimQuote": "Therefore, it is not clear and obvious on the record before us that BAHC could not obtain the relief it seeks on appeal, a one-year prospective injunction.", "date": "2018-03-07", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q8-bud-prospective" }, { "id": "q8-aca-remedies", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(e).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports the statutory remedies and irreparable-harm language for breach of a covenant not to compete.", "verbatimQuote": "In a private court action, a court may award the employer damages for a breach of a covenant not to compete agreement, appropriate injunctive relief, or both, if appropriate.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q8-aca-remedies" }, { "id": "q8-aca-reformation", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(f).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports the statutory reformation remedy for unreasonable restrictions.", "verbatimQuote": "The court shall enforce the covenant not to compete agreement under the reformed terms and conditions.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q8-aca-reformation" } ] }, { "slug": "injunction-remedies", "label": "What remedies are available?", "heading": "What remedies are available for breach of an Arkansas non-compete?", "answerText": "A court may award damages, appropriate injunctive relief, or both, and immediate harm from breach is statutorily treated as irreparable for preliminary-injunction purposes.", "sources": [ { "id": "q9-aca-remedies", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(e).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports damages, appropriate injunctive relief, or both in a private action for breach of a covenant not to compete.", "verbatimQuote": "In a private court action, a court may award the employer damages for a breach of a covenant not to compete agreement, appropriate injunctive relief, or both, if appropriate.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q9-aca-remedies" }, { "id": "q9-aca-irreparable", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(e).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports treating immediate harm from breach as irreparable for preliminary-injunction purposes.", "verbatimQuote": "The immediate harm associated with the breach of a covenant not to compete agreement shall be considered irreparable to establish the appropriateness of a preliminary injunction.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q9-aca-irreparable" }, { "id": "q9-porters-after-2015", "authorityType": "case-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Porter's Commercial Refrigeration, Inc. v. Brewer", "citation": "Porter's Com. Refrigeration, Inc. v. Brewer, 2024 Ark. App. 232, 688 S.W.3d 145.", "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/9490284/porters-commercial-refrigeration-inc-v-danny-a-brewer-jason-spears/", "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/9490284/porters-commercial-refrigeration-inc-v-danny-a-brewer-jason-spears/#:~:text=The%20grounds%20for%20establishing%20the,noncompete%20agreements%20executed%20after%202015.", "proposition": "Porter's supports applying the statutory irreparable-harm framework to breaches of non-compete agreements executed after 2015.", "verbatimQuote": "The grounds for establishing the right to an injunction are straightforward, but the analysis becomes layered in the context of allegations regarding breaches of noncompete agreements executed after 2015.", "date": "2024-04-03", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q9-porters-after-2015" }, { "id": "q9-porters-statutory-harm", "authorityType": "case-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Porter's Commercial Refrigeration, Inc. v. Brewer", "citation": "Porter's Com. Refrigeration, Inc. v. Brewer, 2024 Ark. App. 232, 688 S.W.3d 145.", "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/9490284/porters-commercial-refrigeration-inc-v-danny-a-brewer-jason-spears/", "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/9490284/porters-commercial-refrigeration-inc-v-danny-a-brewer-jason-spears/#:~:text=This%20means%20that%20a%20party,a%20breach%20of%20the%20noncompete.", "proposition": "Porter's supports the rule that a party can establish statutory irreparable harm by showing immediate harm associated with breach of a post-2015 non-compete.", "verbatimQuote": "This means that a party seeking a preliminary injunction concerning a noncompete agreement executed after 2015 can establish irreparable harm by establishing immediate harm associated with a breach of the noncompete.", "date": "2024-04-03", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q9-porters-statutory-harm" }, { "id": "q9-aca-savings", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(e).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports preserving other defenses to preliminary injunctive relief and monetary-damages rights.", "verbatimQuote": "This subsection does not limit: (A) Any other defense available to a party against a claim for preliminary injunctive relief; or (B) An employer's right to monetary damages for breach of a covenant not to compete agreement.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q9-aca-savings" } ] }, { "slug": "related-covenants", "label": "What about non-solicits and NDAs?", "heading": "How does Arkansas treat non-solicitation, confidentiality, and trade-secret agreements?", "answerText": "Section 4-75-101 does not apply to employee agreements that do not concern competition or competitive work, including employee non-solicits, confidentiality agreements, and nondisclosure agreements; existing common-law standards remain in effect for those agreements.", "sources": [ { "id": "q10-aca-related-covenants", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(i).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports the statutory carve-out for employee agreements that do not concern competition or competitive work, including employee non-solicits, confidentiality agreements, and nondisclosure agreements.", "verbatimQuote": "This section shall not apply to other types of agreements between employers and employees that do not concern competition or competitive work, including: (A) Agreements not to solicit, recruit, or hire employees; (B) Confidentiality agreements; (C) Nondisclosure agreements; and (D) The terms and conditions of an employment or employment agreement.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q10-aca-related-covenants" }, { "id": "q10-aca-atsa", "authorityType": "primary-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101", "citation": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101(j).", "enactedCitation": "Acts 2015, No. 921, § 1; 2025, No. 232, §§ 1-3.", "url": "https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&pddocfullpath=/shared/document/statutes-legislation/urn:contentItem:6F8J-XPN0-R03K-P3X3-00008-00", "proposition": "Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 supports preserving protections and rights under the Arkansas Trade Secrets Act.", "verbatimQuote": "Except as provided under subsection (k) of this section, this section shall not: (1) Be read to impair, limit, or change a party's protections and rights under the Arkansas Trade Secrets Act, § 4-75-601 et seq.; or (2) Apply to a person holding a professional license under Arkansas Code Title 17, Subtitle 3.", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q10-aca-atsa" }, { "id": "q10-bendinger-trade-secrets", "authorityType": "case-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Bendinger v. Marshalltown Trowel Co.", "citation": "Bendinger v. Marshalltown Trowel Co., 338 Ark. 410, 994 S.W.2d 468 (1999).", "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2454655/bendinger-v-marshalltown-trowell-co/", "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2454655/bendinger-v-marshalltown-trowell-co/#:~:text=We%20next%20turn%20to%20Marshalltown%E2%80%99s,to%20enforce%20the%20restrictive%20covenant.", "proposition": "Bendinger supports separate analysis of trade-secret injunctive relief from non-compete enforcement.", "verbatimQuote": "We next turn to Marshalltown’s cross-appeal where it challenges the chancellor’s denial of injunctive relief under the Arkansas Trade Secrets Act, since this issue may have merit independent from our decision not to enforce the restrictive covenant.", "date": "1999-07-15", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-q10-bendinger-trade-secrets" } ] }, { "slug": "sale-of-business", "label": "How are sale-of-business covenants treated?", "heading": "Are sale-of-business non-competes judged differently in Arkansas?", "answerText": "Yes. A covenant a seller gives when selling a business is judged under common-law reasonableness, and the Arkansas Supreme Court applies less scrutiny to it than to an employment covenant — the covenant statute reaches employment covenants, not the sale of a business.", "sources": [ { "id": "bendinger-sale-distinction", "authorityType": "case-law", "tier": "primary-source-backed", "title": "Bendinger v. Marshalltown Trowel Co.", "citation": "Bendinger v. Marshalltown Trowel Co., 338 Ark. 410, 994 S.W.2d 468 (1999).", "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2454655/bendinger-v-marshalltown-trowell-co/", "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2454655/bendinger-v-marshalltown-trowell-co/#:~:text=covenants%20not%20to%20compete%20in,a%20sale%20of%20a%20business.", "proposition": "The Arkansas Supreme Court holds that covenants not to compete in employment contracts are subject to stricter scrutiny than those connected with the sale of a business, confirming that seller covenants are judged less searchingly than employment covenants.", "verbatimQuote": "covenants not to compete in employment contracts are subject to stricter scrutiny than those connected with a sale of a business.", "date": "1999-06-24", "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/arkansas#src-bendinger-sale-distinction" } ] } ] } }