Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 49.62.050 (2026)

Unenforceable provisions

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
A provision in a noncompetition covenant signed by an employee or independent contractor who is Washington-based is void and unenforceable:
(1) If the covenant requires the employee or independent contractor to adjudicate a noncompetition covenant outside of this state;
(2) To the extent it deprives the employee or independent contractor of the protections or benefits of this chapter; or
(3) If it allows or requires the application of choice of law principles or the substantive law of any jurisdiction other than Washington state.
[ 2024 c 36 s 4; 2019 c 299 s 6.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2021–2024 · leading case: Rutter v. Bright Horizons Fam. Solutions Inc (W.D. Wash. 2024).
Rutter v. Bright Horizons Fam. Solutions Inc (W.D. Wash. 2024). · cites it 5× “CODE § 49.62.050. 24 2 WASH. REV. CODE § 19.86.”
Groupon, Inc. v. Shin (N.D. Ill. 2022). “Wash. Rev. Code § 49.62.050 (emphasis added).”
Permobil, Inc. v. Westphal (M.D. Tenn. 2024). “13 at 2 (citing Wash. Rev. Code § 49.62.050 )).1 Because the 1 Wash.”
CVS Pharmacy Inc v. Brown (W.D. Wash. 2021). “RCW 49.62.050. And the Court finds the 18 RSUs did not give Brown equity in CVS, meaning that the exclusion in the Noncompete Act is 19 inapplicable.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.