Is this new law retroactive?

Sec. 11. This chapter applies to all proceedings commenced on or after the effective date of this section, regardless of when the cause of action arose. To this extent, this chapter applies retroactively, but in all other respects it applies prospectively.

Sec. 13. This act takes effect January 1, 2020
Click to expand...

I have no idea. When a statute is unclear, it's a bad statute. By the way, if the Governor doesn't sign it, it doesn't take effect at all.
 
adjusterjack said:
Sec. 11. This chapter applies to all proceedings commenced on or after the effective date of this section, regardless of when the cause of action arose. To this extent, this chapter applies retroactively, but in all other respects it applies prospectively.

Sec. 13. This act takes effect January 1, 2020
Click to expand...
I have no idea. When a statute is unclear, it's a bad statute. By the way, if the Governor doesn't sign it, it doesn't take effect at all.
Click to expand...

They way I read what you posted is that any proceedings that have already concluded are not affected, but proceedings that have not commenced are affected.
 
Law was already signed and goes in force January 1st.
Yes, shoot me, if I could understand what that section means. But I have been stuck in non compete for 15 years.
 
Determining whether it's retroactive would require reading the whole thing (which I'm not going to do) and likely would require some legal research).

If you explain your factual situation, we might be able to offer some input. Otherwise, you'll need to consult with a Washington attorney.
 
ukrkoz said:
I am most curious if this new law is retroactive or not.
Click to expand...

The bill states the following:

"This chapter applies to all proceedings commenced on or after the effective date of this section, regardless of when the cause of action arose. To this extent, this chapter applies retroactively, but in all other respects it applies prospectively."
 
"ex post facto": A law that illegalizes an act that was legal (or protected activity under the when committed, increases the penalties for an infraction after it has been committed, or changes the rules of evidence to make conviction easier.

The US Constitution prohibits a legislature from creating any ex post facto law.

The Ninth Amendment of the United States Constitution is the section of the Bill of Rights that states that there are other rights that may exist aside from the ones explicitly mentioned, and even though they are not listed, it does not mean they can be violated.

expostfacto.JPG
 
zddoodah said:
Determining whether it's retroactive would require reading the whole thing (which I'm not going to do) and likely would require some legal research).

If you explain your factual situation, we might be able to offer some input. Otherwise, you'll need to consult with a Washington attorney.
Click to expand...
OK. I have all intentions to change employer but I have 1yr/35 miles radius from not even sure where, as our company covers 9 states, non compete, prohibiting me from working in the same field.
Add to this that I am in pretty much niche field, with very few job opportunities. With NC in place, I'll have to hop state to change employer.
As I have no intentions of doing that, I am asking, if the new law, that will commence on January 1st 2020, will null my NC or not?
Yes, I do understand that consulting with a WA lawyer is advised and, should I have had spare cash to do so, I would. This is why I am asking here.
Again, thank you for insights.
 
ukrkoz said:
As I have no intentions of doing that, I am asking, if the new law, that will commence on January 1st 2020, will null my NC or not?
Yes, I do understand that consulting with a WA lawyer is advised and, should I have had spare cash to do so, I would. This is why I am asking here.
Again, thank you for insights.
Click to expand...
It's not only "advised", it's REQUIRED. Your request is beyond the scope of this (or any) internet forum.
 
ukrkoz said:
I am asking, if the new law, that will commence on January 1st 2020, will null my NC or not?
Click to expand...


If anyone were to provide you with an answer to your question APPLICABLE to you, that person would need to be a licensed attorney in WA, and would also have to read your non-compete agreement.

That is NOT what people on this website do.

This website has contributors who are volunteers.
Some volunteers are lawyers, all volunteers have had some experience with the legal system, and/or have had involvement with the law for their employer (or in the course of their professional life).

I suspect this answer takes into account the proposed (as yet NOT enacted) law discussed above.

Under the new, proposed law, non-compete agreements will only be enforceable under the following conditions:

1 = An employee earns more than $100,000 a year.

2 = An independent contractor earns $250,000 a year from the employer who created the noncompete agreement.

4 = The employer discloses terms of the noncompete when making an offer or earlier in the hiring process.

To determine if ANY of that applies to you, you'll need to do that which you wish to resist.

Choices, all choices, have consequences.
 
ukrkoz said:
I have all intentions to change employer but I have 1yr/35 miles radius from not even sure where, as our company covers 9 states, non compete, prohibiting me from working in the same field.
Click to expand...

You already got the answer to the question asked.

As far as the application of the law to your situation, one would need to read your NCA and know the circumstances under which you agreed to it. However, I seriously doubt it would be enforceable if you "breach" it after 1/1/20, and it certainly wouldn't if you don't make over $100k. Do you?
 
Judge, I do understand what you saying.
MOF, I would not mind seeking legal aid on this - if there is hope. If "volunteers" clearly say - man, it's dead no go, don't even bother - then why bother, right?
 
ukrkoz said:
Judge, I do understand what you saying.
MOF, I would not mind seeking legal aid on this - if there is hope. If "volunteers" clearly say - man, it's dead no go, don't even bother - then why bother, right?
Click to expand...

Every adult has the ability to do, or not do something.

Your choices, your life, your consequences.

I only am concerned with my choices, as long as others choose to leave me out of their choices.
 
I wanted to thank everyone for their insight.
I'll stick to this explanation

:Upon commencement, all NEW non-compete agreements MUST conform to the new law or face penalties. Existing non-compete clauses are valid only as they would adhere under the new laws, but would not face penalties for non compliant agreements as they are written until they meet the statutory requirement for a new agreement.
 
flyingron said:
Retroactive laws are not necessarily prohibited "ex post facto" laws.
Click to expand...

Which implies that some could be violative of our constitution.

This website doesn't adjudicate anything, as it lacks judicial authority to decide anything.

Opinions are posted here everyday, as are questions.

I'm sure someone is most appreciative of your comment.

Thank you for caring and sharing.

In any case, that issue can only be addressed through the court system upon application for relief.
 
Eh? No. The judiciary (up to the Supreme Court) has found that not all laws with retroactive dates in them fit the definition (as they interpret it, and it is their interpretation that is the Constitutional power) of ex post facto. Such include retroactive penalty changes (such as SORA) and certain regulations provided the enabling legislation permits it.

Certainly, anything that makes something previously not a crime, a crime isn't going to weasel past the ex post facto definition, but there's a body of non-criminal matters such as the one that is the subject of this post that do.
 

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top