Nevada Non-Compete Agreement
Nevada enforces reasonable employee non-competes within limits under NRS 613.195, but never against purely hourly-wage workers. Attorney review available.
Introduction
A non-compete agreement is a contract in which a worker agrees not to compete after leaving, and Nevada draws its line by how that worker is paid: the covenant can never bind an employee paid solely on an hourly wage, only salaried or commissioned staff. Nevada enforces employee non-competes, but only within the guardrails of NRS 613.195. Under that statute a noncompetition covenant is void and unenforceable unless it is supported by valuable consideration, imposes no restraint greater than required to protect the employer, imposes no undue hardship on the employee, and imposes restrictions that are appropriate in relation to the consideration given. Nevada also carves out two groups: a covenant may not apply at all to an employee paid solely on an hourly wage basis (exclusive of tips), and it may not stop a former employee from serving a former customer or client who was not solicited and who voluntarily chose to seek the employee out. Nevada is a mandatory blue-pencil state: if a covenant is supported by consideration but overbroad in time, geography, or scope, the court shall revise it and enforce it as revised rather than throwing it out. There is no fixed statutory number for how long or how wide a covenant may run; courts in Nevada judge reasonableness case by case, and are especially cautious with covenants that restrict physicians or reach beyond where the employer actually does business. This page explains Nevada's rules and offers a template scoped to them. It is a state-law overview, not a promise that any given clause will hold up.
Key Things to Know
- 1
A non-compete agreement is a contract in which one party, usually an employee, agrees not to compete with a business for a set time and area after the relationship ends. In Nevada a reasonable employee non-compete is enforceable within the limits of NRS 613.195.
- 2
Nevada enforces non-competes under NRS 613.195: a covenant is void and unenforceable unless it is supported by valuable consideration, imposes no restraint greater than required to protect the employer, imposes no undue hardship on the employee, and imposes restrictions appropriate in relation to the consideration.
- 3
Nevada has no salary or dollar income threshold. Instead NRS 613.195(3) draws a pay-basis line: a non-compete may not apply to an employee paid solely on an hourly wage basis, exclusive of tips or gratuities. Salaried and commissioned employees can be bound; purely hourly employees cannot. Do not import another state's dollar figure.
- 4
Nevada sets no fixed maximum duration or geographic radius. Reasonableness is judged case by case: the time, area, and scope of restricted activity must be no broader than needed to protect the employer. Courts in Nevada generally require the restraint to track where the employer actually does business.
- 5
NRS 613.195(1)(a) requires valuable consideration. Nevada has no advance-notice-before-signing rule, but whether continued at-will employment alone is enough consideration is scrutinized; a signing bonus, raise, promotion, or access to confidential information makes a Nevada covenant more defensible.
- 6
NRS 613.195(2) bars restricting a former employee from serving a former customer or client who was not solicited and voluntarily sought the employee out. If a covenant is overbroad but supported by consideration, a Nevada court shall blue-pencil (revise) it and enforce it as revised rather than voiding it.
- 7
Because non-competes are limited and cannot bind hourly workers, Nevada employers also protect confidential information with a confidentiality or non-disclosure agreement under the Nevada Uniform Trade Secrets Act (NRS Chapter 600A) and NRS 613.200(4), which is often the better tool.
Key decisions before you file
Before you file a Non-Compete Agreement in Nevada, a few decisions shape the document: which option to choose and what each one means. The Non-Compete Agreement guide walks through them.
Open the Non-Compete Agreement guideCustomize your Non-Compete Agreement Template with DocDraft
Nevada Requirements for Non-Compete Agreement
In Nevada a reasonable employee non-compete is enforceable. NRS 613.195 makes a noncompetition covenant void and unenforceable unless it is supported by valuable consideration, imposes no restraint greater than required to protect the employer, imposes no undue hardship on the employee, and imposes restrictions appropriate in relation to the consideration. A covenant that meets those tests and is reasonably tailored can be enforced in Nevada.
Nevada has no salary or dollar income threshold for non-competes. Instead NRS 613.195(3) provides that a covenant may not apply to an employee paid solely on an hourly wage basis, exclusive of any tips or gratuities. This is a pay-basis line, not a dollar figure: salaried and commissioned employees can be bound, purely hourly employees cannot. Do not substitute another state's wage threshold for a Nevada worker.
Nevada sets no fixed maximum duration or geographic radius. Under NRS 613.195(1) the restraint must be no greater than required to protect the employer, must not impose undue hardship on the employee, and must be appropriate in relation to the consideration. Courts in Nevada generally require the time, area, and scope of restricted activity to track where the employer actually does business, and are skeptical of longer or open-ended restraints.
NRS 613.195(1)(a) requires the covenant to be supported by valuable consideration. Nevada has no advance-notice-before-signing rule, but whether continued at-will employment alone is enough consideration is scrutinized by courts in Nevada. New consideration such as a signing bonus, raise, promotion, or access to confidential information makes a Nevada covenant more defensible. Recite the consideration in the agreement.
NRS 613.195(2) bars a covenant from restricting a former employee from serving a former customer or client if the employee did not solicit that customer, the customer voluntarily chose to leave and seek out the employee, and the employee otherwise complies with the covenant. Any provision that violates this rule is void and unenforceable in Nevada, so a customer who follows the employee on their own generally can be served.
Nevada is a mandatory blue-pencil state. Under NRS 613.195, if a covenant is supported by valuable consideration but its limits as to time, geographic area, or scope of activity are unreasonable, the court shall revise the covenant to the extent necessary and enforce the covenant as revised. An overbroad Nevada covenant is generally narrowed rather than thrown out, provided it rests on valid consideration to begin with.
Beyond the statute, courts in Nevada apply extra caution to covenants that restrict physicians and other specialists on public-interest grounds, and generally will not bar a specialist from practicing where the former employer no longer has a physician in that specialty. This is case-law guidance, not a statutory carve-out, so a physician non-compete in Nevada should be scoped narrowly and reviewed carefully before it is relied on.
Because a non-compete is limited and cannot bind hourly workers, many Nevada employers also use a confidentiality or non-disclosure agreement under the Nevada Uniform Trade Secrets Act (NRS Chapter 600A) and NRS 613.200(4), which permits an agreement barring disclosure of trade secrets, business methods, customer lists, or confidential information if supported by consideration and reasonable in scope and duration. A confidentiality agreement can protect information even where a non-compete cannot apply.
Frequently Asked Questions
Yes, within limits. NRS 613.195 allows an employee non-compete, but makes it void and unenforceable unless it is supported by valuable consideration, imposes no restraint greater than required to protect the employer, imposes no undue hardship on the employee, and imposes restrictions appropriate in relation to the consideration. A covenant that meets those tests and is reasonably tailored is enforceable in Nevada. A covenant that is overbroad or unsupported by consideration is not, and a covenant can never apply to a purely hourly employee.
Nevada sets no fixed statutory maximum. NRS 613.195 requires that the restraint be no greater than required to protect the employer and impose no undue hardship on the employee, so the duration must be reasonable in light of the legitimate interest being protected. Courts in Nevada generally uphold shorter, tightly scoped terms of about one to two years tied to the employer's actual market, and are skeptical of longer or open-ended restraints. There is no guaranteed length; reasonableness is decided case by case.
No. NRS 613.195(3) provides that a noncompetition covenant may not apply to an employee who is paid solely on an hourly wage basis, exclusive of any tips or gratuities. This is a categorical bar, not a dollar threshold: it turns on how the worker is paid, not how much. Salaried and commissioned employees can be bound if the covenant is otherwise valid, but a purely hourly worker cannot be. An employer that tries to enforce a covenant against an hourly employee may owe that employee attorney's fees and costs.
No. Unlike states such as Washington, Illinois, or Colorado, Nevada does not set a dollar income floor that a worker must clear before a non-compete can apply. Nevada instead uses a pay-basis rule under NRS 613.195(3): a non-compete may not apply to an employee paid solely on an hourly wage basis, exclusive of tips. So the question in Nevada is whether the employee is hourly, not whether the employee earns a particular salary. Do not rely on another state's dollar threshold for a Nevada worker.
Yes. Nevada is a mandatory blue-pencil state. Under NRS 613.195, if an employer sues to enforce a covenant that is supported by valuable consideration but whose limits as to time, geographic area, or scope of activity are unreasonable and impose a greater-than-necessary restraint, the court shall revise the covenant to the extent necessary and enforce the covenant as revised. That means an overbroad Nevada covenant is generally narrowed rather than thrown out in full, provided it rests on valid consideration in the first place.
Not always. NRS 613.195(2) provides that a covenant may not restrict a former employee from providing service to a former customer or client if the employee did not solicit that customer, the customer voluntarily chose to leave and seek out the former employee, and the employee is otherwise complying with the covenant's limits. So in Nevada a customer who follows you on their own, without any contact you started, generally can be served. Any covenant provision that violates this rule is void and unenforceable.
They use a confidentiality or non-disclosure agreement and rely on the Nevada Uniform Trade Secrets Act (NRS Chapter 600A), which lets a business sue over the misappropriation of a trade secret. NRS 613.200(4) expressly permits an agreement barring disclosure of trade secrets, business methods, customer lists, secret formulas or processes, or confidential information, if supported by valuable consideration and reasonable in scope and duration. A confidentiality agreement can even bind hourly workers, who cannot be subject to a non-compete in Nevada.
No. In 2024 the Federal Trade Commission issued a rule that would have banned most non-competes nationwide, but a federal court set it aside before it took effect, so it is not currently in force, and its status has remained unsettled. Either way, Nevada's own statute, NRS 613.195, independently governs whether an employee non-compete is enforceable in Nevada, so the federal rule's fate does not change Nevada law today.