State-by-State Comparison
Non-compete extensions during breach vary by US state
This page lists each US state alongside the structured summary answer for whether a restriction is extended during a breach.
Non-compete extensions during breach by state (56 jurisdictions)
| Jurisdiction | Answer | Last reviewed | Details |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for Alabama | |
| Alaska | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for Alaska | |
| American Samoa | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for American Samoa | |
| Arizona | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for Arizona | |
| Arkansas | Open question — prospective injunctions allowed, contractual tolling unsettled | Details for Arkansas | |
| California | No (covenant is void) | Details for California | |
| Colorado | Open question — threshold must be met at enforcement, cutting against extension | Details for Colorado | |
| Connecticut | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for Connecticut | |
| Delaware | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for Delaware | |
| District of Columbia | Open question — caps run as fixed days from separation | Details for District of Columbia | |
| Florida | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for Florida | |
| Georgia | No — courts will not extend beyond expiration | Details for Georgia | |
| Guam | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for Guam | |
| Hawaii | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for Hawaii | |
| Idaho | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for Idaho | |
| Illinois | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for Illinois | |
| Indiana | Unsettled | Details for Indiana | |
| Iowa | Unsettled | Details for Iowa | |
| Kansas | No — Doan declined an indefinite tolling-during-breach clause | Details for Kansas | |
| Kentucky | Unsettled | Details for Kentucky | |
| Louisiana | No authority found in our review — likely barred by 2-year cap | Details for Louisiana | |
| Maine | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for Maine | |
| Maryland | Unsettled | Details for Maryland | |
| Massachusetts | No automatic extension; statutory misconduct trigger (up to 2 yrs) or express tolling clause | Details for Massachusetts | |
| Michigan | Unsettled | Details for Michigan | |
| Minnesota | — | Details for Minnesota | |
| Mississippi | No judicial tolling (Frierson); express extension clause given effect (Cascio) | Details for Mississippi | |
| Missouri | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for Missouri | |
| Montana | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for Montana | |
| Nebraska | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for Nebraska | |
| Nevada | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for Nevada | |
| New Hampshire | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for New Hampshire | |
| New Jersey | Yes — court may toll the restricted period during an actual breach (ADP v. Kusins) | Details for New Jersey | |
| New Mexico | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for New Mexico | |
| New York | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for New York | |
| North Carolina | Express tolling clauses enforced (federal courts); equitable tolling unsettled | Details for North Carolina | |
| North Dakota | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for North Dakota | |
| Northern Mariana Islands | No authority found in our review — rely on an explicit tolling clause kept within § 188 reasonableness | Details for Northern Mariana Islands | |
| Ohio | Yes — a covenant may not expire while enforceability is litigated (Homan) | Details for Ohio | |
| Oklahoma | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for Oklahoma | |
| Oregon | No authority found in our review — 12-month-from-termination cap cuts against tolling | Details for Oregon | |
| Pennsylvania | Unsettled | Details for Pennsylvania | |
| Puerto Rico | No authority found in our review — risky if it pushes enforcement past the 12-month ceiling | Details for Puerto Rico | |
| Rhode Island | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for Rhode Island | |
| South Carolina | Points against it — extending past stated end date is against public policy (Stonhard) | Details for South Carolina | |
| South Dakota | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for South Dakota | |
| Tennessee | Open question — 2026 statute silent | Details for Tennessee | |
| Texas | Unsettled — any extension must satisfy § 15.50(a) reasonableness | Details for Texas | |
| U.S. Virgin Islands | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for U.S. Virgin Islands | |
| Utah | No safe extension — one-year cap runs from separation; equitable tolling within the cap open | Details for Utah | |
| Vermont | No equitable rewriting of the time term (Roy's Orthopedic) | Details for Vermont | |
| Virginia | Not resolved — strict construction makes an extension clause an overbreadth risk | Details for Virginia | |
| Washington | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for Washington | |
| West Virginia | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for West Virginia | |
| Wisconsin | No — an extension-during-breach clause voids the entire covenant (H&R Block v. Swenson) | Details for Wisconsin | |
| Wyoming | Not addressed by statute; no case law found in our review | Details for Wyoming |