3 Für Diskussionen über Covenants, in Arztpraxen nicht zu konkurrieren, siehe allgemein Paula Berg, Judicial Enforcement of Covenants Not to Compete Between Physicians: Protecting Doctors` Interests at Patients` Expense, 45 Rutgers L. Rev. 1 (1992) [im Folgenden Judicial Enforcement of Covenants]; Kevin D. Koons, Physician Employee Non-Compete Agreements on the Examination Table: The Need to Better Protect Patients` and the Public’s Interests in Indiana, 6 Ind. Health L. Rev. 253 (2009) [ Physician Employee Non-Compete Agreements ]; S. Elizabeth Wilborn Malloy, Physician Restrictive Covenants: The Neglect of Incumbent Patient Interests, 41 Wake Forest L. Rev. 189 (2006) [im Folgenden Physician Restrictive Covenants]; John Sanchez, A Survey of Physician Non-Compete Agreements in Employment Under Florida Law, 35 Nova L. Rev.
63 (2010) [im Folgenden Survey of Physician Non-Compete Agreements]. By amending Chapter 542, the Florida legislature is attempting to address the power imbalance between doctors and their employers close to the hospital in rural areas of the state. Over the past decade, many doctors, largely due to the current reimbursement climate, have sold their practices to companies linked to hospitals or medical groups close to the hospital and have become employees. It is customary for doctors working in hospitals to sign extended competition bans that prohibit them from practising in the same geographical area for two years after leaving the claimant`s employment relationship. These non-competition clauses apply even if the contracts are not renewed by the employer. The result in rural Florida districts has been a lack of competition for medical specialists and the choice available to patients. However, the new law limits efforts to limit competition and creates options for patients. Lawyers and doctors: why not parity? When faced with non-compete rules, Florida courts tend to mitigate the impact: they limit their perimeter, allow doctors to keep their referrals, and allow patients to find relocated doctors. The kind of cases is due to cognitive dissonance on the part of policymakers, who consciously or unconsciously intuitate that there is something crazy when it comes to applying a “uniform limitation of trade or commerce” to the unique context of health professionals.
Perhaps the overall message here is that doctors, just like lawyers, should not be bound by non-competition rules. 34 In Proudfoot, 576 F.3d at 1223, the 11th Circuit did not confirm the geographic area, but upheld the District Court`s decision that all of the United States, Canada, and Europe were appropriate. In short, the employee had to either stop doing his job or search the globe for work on relatively isolated foreign soil. The 11th Circuit cites other cases (none with doctors) in which the courts have allowed large areas. Id. at 1238-39. In Florida, there are medical policies that match those of the ABA and the Florida Bar. For example, the Florida legislature, which emphasizes the importance of patients “making an informed choice in choosing a physician,” has recognized that protecting the physician-patient relationship is a matter of “public health and safety.” 56 If we decree this ourselves with the non-competition clause, which obliges the courts to take into account “the effects of the application on public health, safety and welfare”, there seems to be a solid basis for invalidating non-compete obligations for doctors.57 However, there is currently no general prohibition of restrictive agreements for doctors. . . .