{
  "type": "practice-guide",
  "canonical": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana",
  "links": [
    {
      "rel": "self",
      "href": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana.json",
      "type": "application/json"
    },
    {
      "rel": "alternate",
      "href": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana",
      "type": "text/html"
    },
    {
      "rel": "alternate",
      "href": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana/markdown",
      "type": "text/markdown"
    },
    {
      "rel": "alternate",
      "href": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana/json",
      "type": "application/json"
    }
  ],
  "data": {
    "topic": "non-compete",
    "state": "montana",
    "frontmatter": {
      "title": "Non-Competes in Montana",
      "description": "Montana starts from § 28-2-703's restraint-of-trade rule, but the Dobbins partial-restraint rule of reason leaves narrow covenants enforceable, while § 28-2-724 now bans many health-care provider non-competes in 2025 and 2026.",
      "state": "Montana",
      "lastReviewed": "2026-06-02",
      "license": "CC BY 4.0",
      "authors": [
        "steven-obiajulu"
      ],
      "summary": {
        "enforceability": "reasonable",
        "bottomLine": "Montana's restraint-of-trade statute voids absolute restraints, but reasonable partial restraints survive under the Dobbins rule of reason, and covered health-care provider non-competes are now banned.",
        "keyLaw": "Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-703 (Dobbins, DeGuire & Tucker, P.C. v. Rutherford, 708 P.2d 577 (Mont. 1985))",
        "exceptions": "Health-care provider ban (§ 28-2-724, HB 198/HB 620, all physicians Jan 1, 2026); sale-of-goodwill (§ 28-2-704); partnership dissolution (§ 28-2-705); employer-initiated termination usually defeats enforcement (Wrigg)",
        "courtNarrowing": "no",
        "appliesToContractors": "unclear",
        "extendedForBreach": "Not addressed",
        "maxLength": "No general statutory limit",
        "noticeRequirement": "None",
        "incomeThreshold": "None",
        "saleOfBusiness": "Allowed for sale of goodwill",
        "customerNonSolicit": "Partial-restraint analysis; scope unsettled",
        "employeeNonSolicit": "Partial-restraint analysis; scope unsettled"
      },
      "about": [
        "Montana non-compete agreements",
        "Montana restrictive covenants",
        "Dobbins test",
        "Mont. Code Ann. 28-2-703",
        "Mont. Code Ann. 28-2-724",
        "Montana Uniform Trade Secrets Act",
        "Montana healthcare non-compete ban"
      ],
      "translations": [
        {
          "language": "中文",
          "status": "planned"
        },
        {
          "language": "Español",
          "status": "planned"
        },
        {
          "language": "Português",
          "status": "planned"
        },
        {
          "language": "Deutsch",
          "status": "planned"
        }
      ],
      "relatedForm": {
        "slug": "openagreements-restrictive-covenant-montana"
      }
    },
    "questions": [
      {
        "slug": "employee-non-compete-enforceability",
        "label": "Are employee non-competes enforceable in Montana?",
        "heading": "Are employee non-compete agreements enforceable in Montana?",
        "answerText": "Sometimes. Montana Code § 28-2-703 makes restraints on a lawful profession, trade, or business void, but Montana is not a California-style total-ban state because Dobbins preserves reasonable partial restraints.",
        "sources": [
          {
            "id": "montana-restraint-baseline",
            "authorityType": "primary-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-703",
            "citation": "Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-703.",
            "url": "https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0280/chapter_0020/part_0070/section_0030/0280-0020-0070-0030.html",
            "proposition": "Section 28-2-703 supports Montana's statutory baseline that contracts restraining a lawful profession, trade, or business are void except as otherwise provided.",
            "verbatimQuote": "28-2-703. Contracts in restraint of trade generally void. Any contract by which anyone is restrained from exercising a lawful profession, trade, or business of any kind, otherwise than is provided for by 28-2-704 or 28-2-705, is to that extent void.",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-montana-restraint-baseline"
          },
          {
            "id": "dobbins-partial-restraint",
            "authorityType": "case-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Dobbins, DeGuire & Tucker, P.C. v. Rutherford, MacDonald & Olson",
            "citation": "Dobbins, DeGuire & Tucker, P.C. v. Rutherford, MacDonald & Olson, 218 Mont. 392, 708 P.2d 577 (1985).",
            "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1183224/dobbins-deguire-tucker-pc-v-rutherford-macdonald-olson/",
            "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1183224/dobbins-deguire-tucker-pc-v-rutherford-macdonald-olson/#:~:text=We%20hold%20that%20the%20written,prohibited%20by%20Section%2028%2D2%2D703%2C%20MCA.",
            "proposition": "Dobbins supports the rule that a fee-for-client covenant that does not prohibit accounting practice is a partial restraint rather than a prohibited restraint under § 28-2-703.",
            "verbatimQuote": "We hold that the written contract provisions do not constitute a restraint prohibited by Section 28-2-703, MCA.",
            "date": "1985-11-06",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-dobbins-partial-restraint"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "slug": "dobbins-test",
        "label": "What is the Dobbins test?",
        "heading": "What is the Dobbins test for Montana non-competes?",
        "answerText": "For a partial restraint, Montana asks whether the covenant is limited as to time or place, supported by good consideration, and reasonably protects the employer without imposing an unreasonable burden on the employee or the public.",
        "sources": [
          {
            "id": "dobbins-three-part-test",
            "authorityType": "case-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Dobbins, DeGuire & Tucker, P.C. v. Rutherford, MacDonald & Olson",
            "citation": "Dobbins, DeGuire & Tucker, P.C. v. Rutherford, MacDonald & Olson, 218 Mont. 392, 708 P.2d 577 (1985).",
            "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1183224/dobbins-deguire-tucker-pc-v-rutherford-macdonald-olson/",
            "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1183224/dobbins-deguire-tucker-pc-v-rutherford-macdonald-olson/#:~:text=%E2%80%9C(1)%20the%20covenant%20should%20be,the%20employee%20or%20the%20public.%E2%80%9D",
            "proposition": "Dobbins supplies Montana's three-part reasonableness test for partial restraints.",
            "verbatimQuote": "“(1) the covenant should be limited in operation either as to time or place; (2) the covenant should be based on some good consideration; and (3) the covenant should afford a reasonable protection for and not impose an unreasonable burden upon the employer, the employee or the public.”",
            "date": "1985-11-06",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-dobbins-three-part-test"
          },
          {
            "id": "alborn-dobbins-partial",
            "authorityType": "case-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Junkermier, Clark, Campanella, Stevens, P.C. v. Alborn, Uithoven, Riekenberg, P.C.",
            "citation": "Junkermier, Clark, Campanella, Stevens, P.C. v. Alborn, Uithoven, Riekenberg, P.C., 2016 MT 218, 384 Mont. 464, 380 P.3d 747.",
            "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4254366/junkermier-clark-campanella-stevens-pc-v-alborn-uithoven/",
            "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4254366/junkermier-clark-campanella-stevens-pc-v-alborn-uithoven/#:~:text=Because%20the%20Covenant%20is%20not,as%20a%20matter%20of%20law.",
            "proposition": "The 2016 Alborn appeal supports applying Dobbins when a covenant only partially restrains trade.",
            "verbatimQuote": "Because the Covenant is not an absolute prohibition, it cannot be declared invalid as a matter of law.",
            "date": "2016-09-06",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-alborn-dobbins-partial"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "slug": "consideration-after-hire",
        "label": "Is continued employment enough consideration in Montana?",
        "heading": "Is continued employment enough consideration for a Montana non-compete signed after hire?",
        "answerText": "Usually no for an at-will employee. Access Organics held that simple continued employment did not supply good consideration for a non-compete signed more than four months after hiring.",
        "sources": [
          {
            "id": "access-continued-employment",
            "authorityType": "case-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Access Organics, Inc. v. Hernandez",
            "citation": "Access Organics, Inc. v. Hernandez, 2008 MT 4, 341 Mont. 73, 175 P.3d 899.",
            "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/888657/access-organics-inc-v-hernandez/",
            "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/888657/access-organics-inc-v-hernandez/#:~:text=In%20such%20circumstances%2C%20the%20simple,not%20serve%20as%20sufficient%20consideration.",
            "proposition": "Access Organics supports the rule that continued at-will employment alone may not be sufficient consideration for a post-hire Montana non-compete.",
            "verbatimQuote": "In such circumstances, the simple fact of the employee’s continued employment may not serve as sufficient consideration.",
            "date": "2008-01-03",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-access-continued-employment"
          },
          {
            "id": "access-independent-consideration",
            "authorityType": "case-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Access Organics, Inc. v. Hernandez",
            "citation": "Access Organics, Inc. v. Hernandez, 2008 MT 4, 341 Mont. 73, 175 P.3d 899.",
            "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/888657/access-organics-inc-v-hernandez/",
            "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/888657/access-organics-inc-v-hernandez/#:~:text=Non%2Dcompete%20agreements%20entered%20into%20by,be%20supported%20by%20independent%20consideration.",
            "proposition": "Access Organics supports using independent consideration, such as a raise, promotion, trade-secret access, or confidential information access, for post-hire non-competes.",
            "verbatimQuote": "Non-compete agreements entered into by existing employees may be supported by independent consideration.",
            "date": "2008-01-03",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-access-independent-consideration"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "slug": "termination-without-cause",
        "label": "What if the employer terminates the employee?",
        "heading": "Can a Montana employer enforce a non-compete after terminating the employee without cause?",
        "answerText": "Generally no. Wrigg held that an employer normally lacks a legitimate business interest in enforcing a covenant when the employer chooses to end the employment relationship.",
        "sources": [
          {
            "id": "wrigg-employer-termination",
            "authorityType": "case-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Wrigg v. Junkermier, Clark, Campanella, Stevens, P.C.",
            "citation": "Wrigg v. Junkermier, Clark, Campanella, Stevens, P.C., 2011 MT 290, 362 Mont. 496, 265 P.3d 646.",
            "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/889623/wrigg-v-junkermier-clark-campanella-stevens-pc/",
            "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/889623/wrigg-v-junkermier-clark-campanella-stevens-pc/#:~:text=This%20disfavor%20only%20heightens%20when,the%20covenant%20not%20to%20compete.",
            "proposition": "Wrigg supports the rule that an employer normally lacks a legitimate business interest in enforcing a covenant after the employer ends the employment relationship.",
            "verbatimQuote": "This disfavor only heightens when an employer chooses to end the employment relationship and yet seeks to enforce the covenant not to compete.",
            "date": "2011-11-22",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-wrigg-employer-termination"
          },
          {
            "id": "wrigg-misconduct-exception",
            "authorityType": "case-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Wrigg v. Junkermier, Clark, Campanella, Stevens, P.C.",
            "citation": "Wrigg v. Junkermier, Clark, Campanella, Stevens, P.C., 2011 MT 290, 362 Mont. 496, 265 P.3d 646.",
            "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/889623/wrigg-v-junkermier-clark-campanella-stevens-pc/",
            "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/889623/wrigg-v-junkermier-clark-campanella-stevens-pc/#:~:text=A%20court%20should%20analyze%20whether,employee%20with%20an%20unfair%20advantage.",
            "proposition": "Wrigg directs courts to analyze whether the former employee used trade secrets, customer relationships, or proprietary information that would supply an unfair advantage — which can establish a legitimate business interest even after an employer-initiated separation.",
            "verbatimQuote": "A court should analyze whether the former employee used trade secrets, customer relationships, or proprietary information that would provide an employee with an unfair advantage.",
            "date": "2011-11-22",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-wrigg-misconduct-exception"
          },
          {
            "id": "wrigg-trade-secret-analysis",
            "authorityType": "case-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Wrigg v. Junkermier, Clark, Campanella, Stevens, P.C.",
            "citation": "Wrigg v. Junkermier, Clark, Campanella, Stevens, P.C., 2011 MT 290, 362 Mont. 496, 265 P.3d 646.",
            "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/889623/wrigg-v-junkermier-clark-campanella-stevens-pc/",
            "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/889623/wrigg-v-junkermier-clark-campanella-stevens-pc/#:~:text=JCCS%20never%20alleges%20that%20Wrigg,accounting%20needs%20of%20JCCS%E2%80%99s%20clients.",
            "proposition": "Wrigg supports analyzing whether the former employee actually acquired trade secrets or intimate client knowledge before enforcing a covenant after termination.",
            "verbatimQuote": "JCCS never alleges that Wrigg acquired any JCCS trade secrets or intimate knowledge regarding any special accounting needs of JCCS’s clients.",
            "date": "2011-11-22",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-wrigg-trade-secret-analysis"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "slug": "customer-fee-restraints",
        "label": "Are customer fee and non-solicitation clauses enforceable?",
        "heading": "Are fee-for-service and customer-fee clauses enforceable in Montana?",
        "answerText": "They can be. Montana courts have treated customer-linked fee provisions as partial restraints when the worker remains free to compete and serve the customer, subject to a contract payment.",
        "sources": [
          {
            "id": "q5-montana-restraint-baseline",
            "authorityType": "primary-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-703",
            "citation": "Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-703.",
            "url": "https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0280/chapter_0020/part_0070/section_0030/0280-0020-0070-0030.html",
            "proposition": "Section 28-2-703 voids contracts restraining a business of any kind, so a stand-alone customer or employee non-solicitation clause is itself a restraint on trade subject to the Dobbins partial-restraint analysis.",
            "verbatimQuote": "28-2-703. Contracts in restraint of trade generally void. Any contract by which anyone is restrained from exercising a lawful profession, trade, or business of any kind, otherwise than is provided for by 28-2-704 or 28-2-705, is to that extent void.",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-q5-montana-restraint-baseline"
          },
          {
            "id": "alborn-partial-customer-fee",
            "authorityType": "case-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Junkermier, Clark, Campanella, Stevens, P.C. v. Alborn, Uithoven, Riekenberg, P.C.",
            "citation": "Junkermier, Clark, Campanella, Stevens, P.C. v. Alborn, Uithoven, Riekenberg, P.C., 2016 MT 218, 384 Mont. 464, 380 P.3d 747.",
            "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4254366/junkermier-clark-campanella-stevens-pc-v-alborn-uithoven/",
            "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4254366/junkermier-clark-campanella-stevens-pc-v-alborn-uithoven/#:~:text=Rather%2C%20the%20Covenant%20requires%20Former,their%20departure%20from%20the%20firm.",
            "proposition": "The 2016 Alborn appeal supports treating a former-client fee provision as a partial restraint rather than an absolute prohibition.",
            "verbatimQuote": "Rather, the Covenant requires Former Shareholders to pay liquidated damages if they provide services to a Junkermier client within one year of their departure from the firm.",
            "date": "2016-09-06",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-alborn-partial-customer-fee"
          },
          {
            "id": "jccs-client-payment",
            "authorityType": "case-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Junkermier, Clark, Campanella, Stevens, P.C. v. Alborn",
            "citation": "Junkermier, Clark, Campanella, Stevens, P.C. v. Alborn, 2020 MT 179.",
            "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4767942/jccs-v-alborn/",
            "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4767942/jccs-v-alborn/#:~:text=After%20conducting%20a%20bench%20trial%2C,based%20on%20the%20Dobbins%20factors.",
            "proposition": "The 2020 Alborn appeal supports that, on remand, the covenant was found reasonable under the Dobbins factors.",
            "verbatimQuote": "After conducting a bench trial, the District Court determined JCCS had proven the Covenant was reasonable based on the Dobbins factors.",
            "date": "2020-07-14",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-jccs-client-payment"
          },
          {
            "id": "jccs-legitimate-client-base",
            "authorityType": "case-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Junkermier, Clark, Campanella, Stevens, P.C. v. Alborn",
            "citation": "Junkermier, Clark, Campanella, Stevens, P.C. v. Alborn, 2020 MT 179.",
            "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4767942/jccs-v-alborn/",
            "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4767942/jccs-v-alborn/#:~:text=We%20conclude%20the%20District%20Court,of%20protecting%20its%20client%20base.",
            "proposition": "The 2020 Alborn appeal supports the employer's legitimate business interest in protecting its client base.",
            "verbatimQuote": "We conclude the District Court did not err by finding JCCS had a legitimate business interest in the Covenant of protecting its client base.",
            "date": "2020-07-14",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-jccs-legitimate-client-base"
          },
          {
            "id": "jccs-damages-amount",
            "authorityType": "case-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Junkermier, Clark, Campanella, Stevens, P.C. v. Alborn",
            "citation": "Junkermier, Clark, Campanella, Stevens, P.C. v. Alborn, 2020 MT 179.",
            "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4767942/jccs-v-alborn/",
            "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4767942/jccs-v-alborn/#:~:text=Appellants%20owed%20JCCS%20%242%2C353%2C463.27.",
            "proposition": "The 2020 Alborn appeal concerned a $2,353,463.27 fee-for-service judgment, which the Court affirmed against the former shareholders jointly and severally.",
            "verbatimQuote": "Appellants owed JCCS $2,353,463.27.",
            "date": "2020-07-14",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-jccs-damages-amount"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "slug": "absolute-restraints",
        "label": "What restraints are void in Montana?",
        "heading": "What kinds of non-compete restraints are void in Montana?",
        "answerText": "Absolute restraints are void. A covenant that leaves the worker with no realistic way to practice the trade in the relevant market is likely an unlawful restraint under § 28-2-703.",
        "sources": [
          {
            "id": "curl-unreasonable-restraint",
            "authorityType": "case-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Montana Mountain Products v. Curl",
            "citation": "Mont. Mountain Prods. v. Curl, 2005 MT 102, 327 Mont. 7, 112 P.3d 979.",
            "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/887309/montana-mountain-products-v-curl/",
            "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/887309/montana-mountain-products-v-curl/#:~:text=Because%20the%20covenant%20prohibits%20Curl,an%20unlawful%20restraint%20on%20trade.",
            "proposition": "Curl supports invalidating a covenant that effectively prohibits the worker from practicing her trade in the relevant vicinity.",
            "verbatimQuote": "Because the covenant prohibits Curl from engaging in her profession, we conclude that it is unreasonable and therefore an unlawful restraint on trade.",
            "date": "2005-04-26",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-curl-unreasonable-restraint"
          },
          {
            "id": "mungas-absolute-prohibition",
            "authorityType": "case-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Mungas v. Great Falls Clinic, LLP",
            "citation": "Mungas v. Great Falls Clinic, LLP, 2009 MT 426, 354 Mont. 50, 221 P.3d 1230.",
            "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/888694/mungas-v-great-falls-clinic-llp/",
            "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/888694/mungas-v-great-falls-clinic-llp/#:~:text=The%20Dobbins%20Court%20concluded%20that,not%20to%20compete%20is%20reasonable.",
            "proposition": "Mungas supports the distinction between absolute prohibitions, which are void, and partial restraints, which require reasonableness review.",
            "verbatimQuote": "The Dobbins Court concluded that in those instances where a contract contains a restraint on a person’s ability to practice their profession, but such restraint is not an absolute prohibition, a factual determination must be made as to whether the covenant not to compete is reasonable.",
            "date": "2009-12-15",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-mungas-absolute-prohibition"
          },
          {
            "id": "mungas-no-goodwill-sale",
            "authorityType": "case-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Mungas v. Great Falls Clinic, LLP",
            "citation": "Mungas v. Great Falls Clinic, LLP, 2009 MT 426, 354 Mont. 50, 221 P.3d 1230.",
            "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/888694/mungas-v-great-falls-clinic-llp/",
            "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/888694/mungas-v-great-falls-clinic-llp/#:~:text=Section%2028%2D2%2D704(1)%2C%20MCA%2C%20the%20sale,at%20issue%20in%20this%20case.",
            "proposition": "Mungas supports rejecting the sale-of-goodwill exception when no property sale occurred.",
            "verbatimQuote": "Section 28-2-704(1), MCA, the sale of goodwill exception to the prohibition on contracts in restraint of trade, does not apply to the partnership agreements at issue in this case.",
            "date": "2009-12-15",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-mungas-no-goodwill-sale"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "slug": "sale-partnership-exceptions",
        "label": "What are Montana's statutory exceptions?",
        "heading": "What are the sale-of-business and partnership exceptions in Montana?",
        "answerText": "Montana has two classic statutory exceptions: sale of business goodwill under § 28-2-704 and dissolution of partnership under § 28-2-705.",
        "sources": [
          {
            "id": "montana-goodwill-sale",
            "authorityType": "primary-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-704",
            "citation": "Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-704.",
            "url": "https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0280/chapter_0020/part_0070/section_0040/0280-0020-0070-0040.html",
            "proposition": "Section 28-2-704 supports Montana's sale-of-goodwill exception to the restraint-of-trade rule.",
            "verbatimQuote": "28-2-704. Exception -- sale of goodwill of business. (1) A person who sells the goodwill of a business may agree with the buyer to refrain from carrying on a similar business within the areas provided in subsection (2) so long as the buyer or any person deriving title to the goodwill from the buyer carries on a like business in the described areas.",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-montana-goodwill-sale"
          },
          {
            "id": "montana-goodwill-areas",
            "authorityType": "primary-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-704",
            "citation": "Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-704(2)(e).",
            "url": "https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0280/chapter_0020/part_0070/section_0040/0280-0020-0070-0040.html",
            "proposition": "Section 28-2-704 supports the limited statutory geography available for sale-of-goodwill covenants.",
            "verbatimQuote": "(2) The agreement authorized in subsection (1) may apply in: (a) the city where the principal office of the business is located; (b) the county where the principal office of the business is located; (c) a city in any county adjacent to the county in which the principal office of the business is located; (d) any county adjacent to the county in which the principal office of the business is located; or (e) any combination of the areas in subsections (2)(a) through (2)(d).",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-montana-goodwill-areas"
          },
          {
            "id": "montana-partnership-dissolution",
            "authorityType": "primary-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-705",
            "citation": "Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-705.",
            "url": "https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0280/chapter_0020/part_0070/section_0050/0280-0020-0070-0050.html",
            "proposition": "Section 28-2-705 supports Montana's partnership-dissolution exception.",
            "verbatimQuote": "28-2-705. Exception -- dissolution of partnership. Partners may, upon dissolution of the partnership, agree that one or more of them may not carry on a similar business within the areas provided in 28-2-704(2).",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-montana-partnership-dissolution"
          },
          {
            "id": "mungas-no-goodwill-sale-practice",
            "authorityType": "case-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Mungas v. Great Falls Clinic, LLP",
            "citation": "Mungas v. Great Falls Clinic, LLP, 2009 MT 426, 354 Mont. 50, 221 P.3d 1230.",
            "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/888694/mungas-v-great-falls-clinic-llp/",
            "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/888694/mungas-v-great-falls-clinic-llp/#:~:text=Section%2028%2D2%2D704(1)%2C%20MCA%2C%20the%20sale,at%20issue%20in%20this%20case.",
            "proposition": "Mungas supports rejecting the sale-of-goodwill exception when no property sale occurred.",
            "verbatimQuote": "Section 28-2-704(1), MCA, the sale of goodwill exception to the prohibition on contracts in restraint of trade, does not apply to the partnership agreements at issue in this case.",
            "date": "2009-12-15",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-mungas-no-goodwill-sale-practice"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "slug": "health-care-providers",
        "label": "What health-care provider ban applies in Montana?",
        "heading": "What special non-compete rules apply to Montana health-care providers?",
        "answerText": "Section 28-2-724 bars covered health-care provider contracts from restricting post-relationship practice, services, patient treatment, patient relationships, or patient solicitation, subject to a narrow sale-of-practice exception and a physician-only decreasing-repayment exception.",
        "sources": [
          {
            "id": "montana-healthcare-practice-ban",
            "authorityType": "primary-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-724",
            "citation": "Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-724(1).",
            "url": "https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0280/chapter_0020/part_0070/section_0240/0280-0020-0070-0240.html",
            "proposition": "Section 28-2-724 supports Montana's ban on covered health-care provider practice, service, patient-treatment, patient-relationship, and patient-solicitation restrictions.",
            "verbatimQuote": "(1) A contract that creates or establishes the terms of employment, a partnership, or any other form of professional relationship with a health care provider described in subsection (2) may not restrict the right of the health care provider, after the termination of the employment, partnership, or other form of professional relationship, to: (a) practice or provide services for which the provider is licensed, in any geographic area and for any period; (b) treat, advise, consult with, or establish a provider-patient relationship with any current patient of the employer or with a patient affiliated with a partnership or other form of professional relationship; or (c) solicit or seek to establish a provider-patient relationship with any current patient of the employer or with a patient affiliated with a partnership or other form of professional relationship.",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-montana-healthcare-practice-ban"
          },
          {
            "id": "montana-healthcare-covered-providers",
            "authorityType": "primary-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-724",
            "citation": "Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-724(2).",
            "url": "https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0280/chapter_0020/part_0070/section_0240/0280-0020-0070-0240.html",
            "proposition": "Section 28-2-724 supports the covered-provider list, including physicians, naturopathic physicians, nurses, advanced practice registered nurses, and physician assistants.",
            "verbatimQuote": "(2) The requirements of subsection (1) apply to contracts or agreements involving the following health care providers: (a) a physician licensed under Title 37, chapter 3; (b) a psychologist licensed under Title 37, chapter 17; (c) a naturopathic physician licensed under Title 37, chapter 26; (d) a social worker licensed under Title 37, chapter 39; (e) a professional counselor licensed under Title 37, chapter 39; (f) an addiction counselor licensed under Title 37, chapter 39; (g) a marriage and family therapist licensed under Title 37, chapter 39; (h) a behavioral health peer support specialist licensed under Title 37, chapter 39; (i) a registered professional nurse or an advanced practice registered nurse licensed under Title 37, chapter 8; or (j) a physician assistant licensed under Title 37, chapter 20.",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-montana-healthcare-covered-providers"
          },
          {
            "id": "montana-healthcare-exceptions",
            "authorityType": "primary-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-724",
            "citation": "Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-724(3).",
            "url": "https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0280/chapter_0020/part_0070/section_0240/0280-0020-0070-0240.html",
            "proposition": "Section 28-2-724 supports the sale-and-purchase-of-practice exception and the decreasing physician payback exception.",
            "verbatimQuote": "(3) This section does not apply to a contract in connection with the sale and purchase of a practice or to a provision for repayment of all or a portion of money paid or advanced to a physician licensed under Title 37, chapter 3, that is subject to a payback provision that decreases over time, including but not limited to a bona fide loan, relocation cost, signing bonus, education expense, and tuition repayment expense.",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-montana-healthcare-exceptions"
          },
          {
            "id": "hb198-effective",
            "authorityType": "primary-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "House Bill 198 (Ch. 131, L. 2025)",
            "citation": "2025 Mont. Laws ch. 131 (HB 198), §§ 2-3.",
            "url": "https://archive.legmt.gov/content/Sessions/69th/Contractor_index/CH0131.pdf",
            "proposition": "HB 198 amended § 28-2-724 to add naturopaths, registered and advanced practice nurses, and physician assistants, took effect on passage and approval, and applies to contracts made or renewed on or after its effective date.",
            "verbatimQuote": "Applicability. [This act] applies to contracts made or renewed on or after [the effective date of this act].",
            "date": "2025-04-16",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-hb198-effective"
          },
          {
            "id": "hb620-effective",
            "authorityType": "primary-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "House Bill 620 (Ch. 698, L. 2025)",
            "citation": "2025 Mont. Laws ch. 698 (HB 620), §§ 2-3.",
            "url": "https://archive.legmt.gov/content/Sessions/69th/Contractor_index/CH0698.pdf",
            "proposition": "HB 620 amended § 28-2-724 to add all licensed physicians on a delayed effective date of January 1, 2026, applying to contracts made or renewed on or after that date.",
            "verbatimQuote": "Applicability. [This act] applies to contracts made or renewed on or after January 1, 2026.",
            "date": "2026-01-01",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-hb620-effective"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "slug": "trade-secrets-severance",
        "label": "What alternatives remain after Montana limits non-competes?",
        "heading": "What trade-secret and severance alternatives remain in Montana?",
        "answerText": "Montana employers should usually protect confidential information through the Montana Uniform Trade Secrets Act and narrow confidentiality covenants, while treating severance as a limited fallback rather than a reliable cure for overbroad non-competes.",
        "sources": [
          {
            "id": "mutsa-short-title",
            "authorityType": "primary-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Mont. Code Ann. § 30-14-401",
            "citation": "Mont. Code Ann. § 30-14-401.",
            "url": "https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0300/chapter_0140/part_0040/section_0010/0300-0140-0040-0010.html",
            "proposition": "Section 30-14-401 supports identifying Montana's trade-secret statute as the Uniform Trade Secrets Act.",
            "verbatimQuote": "30-14-401. Short title. This part may be cited as the \"Uniform Trade Secrets Act\".",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-mutsa-short-title"
          },
          {
            "id": "mutsa-trade-secret-definition",
            "authorityType": "primary-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Mont. Code Ann. § 30-14-402",
            "citation": "Mont. Code Ann. § 30-14-402(4).",
            "url": "https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0300/chapter_0140/part_0040/section_0020/0300-0140-0040-0020.html",
            "proposition": "Section 30-14-402 supports MUTSA's definition of trade secret based on independent economic value and reasonable secrecy efforts.",
            "verbatimQuote": "(4) \"Trade secret\" means information or computer software, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process, that: (a) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use; and (b) is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy.",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-mutsa-trade-secret-definition"
          },
          {
            "id": "mutsa-injunction",
            "authorityType": "primary-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Mont. Code Ann. § 30-14-403",
            "citation": "Mont. Code Ann. § 30-14-403(1).",
            "url": "https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0300/chapter_0140/part_0040/section_0030/0300-0140-0040-0030.html",
            "proposition": "Section 30-14-403 supports injunctive relief for actual or threatened trade-secret misappropriation.",
            "verbatimQuote": "30-14-403. Injunctive relief -- royalty. (1) Actual or threatened misappropriation may be enjoined.",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-mutsa-injunction"
          },
          {
            "id": "montana-partial-void",
            "authorityType": "primary-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-604",
            "citation": "Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-604.",
            "url": "https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0280/chapter_0020/part_0060/section_0040/0280-0020-0060-0040.html",
            "proposition": "Section 28-2-604 supports Montana's rule that a contract with distinct lawful and unlawful objects is void as to the unlawful object and valid as to the rest.",
            "verbatimQuote": "28-2-604. When contract partially void. Where a contract has several distinct objects of which one at least is lawful and one at least is unlawful, in whole or in part, the contract is void as to the latter and valid as to the rest.",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-montana-partial-void"
          },
          {
            "id": "curl-void-covenant",
            "authorityType": "case-law",
            "tier": "primary-source-backed",
            "title": "Montana Mountain Products v. Curl",
            "citation": "Mont. Mountain Prods. v. Curl, 2005 MT 102, 327 Mont. 7, 112 P.3d 979.",
            "url": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/887309/montana-mountain-products-v-curl/",
            "deepLink": "https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/887309/montana-mountain-products-v-curl/#:~:text=However%2C%20because%20we%20conclude%20that,judgment%20of%20the%20District%20Court.",
            "proposition": "Curl supports the caution that a Montana court may decline to enforce an unreasonable covenant outright rather than save it with a narrowed reading.",
            "verbatimQuote": "However, because we conclude that the covenant is unreasonable, we nonetheless affirm the judgment of the District Court.",
            "date": "2005-04-26",
            "anchor": "https://openagreements.org/practice-guides/non-compete/us/montana#src-curl-void-covenant"
          }
        ]
      }
    ]
  }
}