IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlstud/doi10.1086-721978.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Subjective Beliefs about Contract Enforceability

Author

Listed:
  • J.J. Prescott
  • Evan Starr

Abstract

This article assesses the content, role, and adaptability of subjective beliefs about contract enforceability in the context of postemployment covenants not to compete (noncompetes). We demonstrate that employees tend to believe that even clearly unenforceable noncompetes are enforceable, including their own. We provide evidence for both supply- and demand-side stories that explain employees’ persistently inaccurate beliefs. Moreover, we show that believing that unenforceable noncompetes are enforceable likely causes employees to forgo better job opportunities and to perceive that their employer is more likely to sue them if they choose to compete. Finally, we use an information experiment to inform employees about the enforceability of their noncompete. While this information matters for employees’ beliefs and prospective behavior, it does not appear to eliminate an unenforceable noncompete as a factor in the decision to take a new job. We conclude with implications for the policy debate regarding the enforceability of noncompetes.

Suggested Citation

  • J.J. Prescott & Evan Starr, 2024. "Subjective Beliefs about Contract Enforceability," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 53(2), pages 435-488.
  • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlstud:doi:10.1086/721978
    DOI: 10.1086/721978
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/721978
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/721978
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/721978?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jlstud:doi:10.1086/721978. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLS .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.