contracts

Dental Non-Compete Enforceability: 2026 State-by-State Guide

By DentalUnlock Team · March 31, 2026 · Updated July 2026

Dental non-compete enforceability varies dramatically by state. California, Oklahoma, North Dakota, and Minnesota effectively ban them. Texas now limits dental non-competes to one year and five miles as of September 2025. Most other states enforce them only if the scope is reasonable.

The non-compete clause in your dental contract might be the most important paragraph in the entire document, and it's the one most dentists spend the least time thinking about.

I get it. When you're reading through a 20-page contract, excited about a new opportunity, the non-compete feels abstract. It only matters if you leave. And you're not planning to leave. You just got here.

Then two years pass. The management changes. The schedule gets cut. The culture shifts. Or you find a better opportunity. And suddenly that paragraph you skimmed controls where you're allowed to work, how far away you have to move, and for how long.

I know an orthodontist who found a practice to buy about 20 miles away. Seemed well outside his non-compete radius. But his contract measured the distance "as the crow flies," not by road. Straight-line distance put the practice inside the zone. His employer didn't just block the purchase. They went and bought the practice themselves, using his own non-compete as the leverage to take the deal from him.

That story is why this page exists. Your non-compete matters. Whether it's enforceable depends on your state. Let's walk through it.

---

The federal picture: there is no federal ban

Let's get this out of the way first, because there's a lot of confusion here.

The FTC issued a nationwide non-compete ban in April 2024 with a Sept 4, 2024 effective date. It never took effect. The Northern District of Texas struck it down in Ryan, LLC v. FTC, the FTC appealed, and on September 5, 2025 the FTC voluntarily abandoned the appeal. Five days later, on September 10, 2025, the FTC announced a new posture: targeted Section 5 enforcement against individual employers, with healthcare flagged as a priority sector.

What this means for you: there is no federal non-compete ban, and there isn't going to be one in the foreseeable future. Enforceability is determined entirely by your state's law — and the FTC's healthcare-focus announcement is a mild signal that egregious clauses in dental and medical employment may draw federal attention case-by-case, but only at the extreme end. State law is the actual fence around your contract.

---

The health care ban trap: most of these laws leave dentistry out

Since 2025 a wave of states has banned or sharply limited non-competes for "health care professionals." If you have read a headline about one of these laws and assumed your dental non-compete died with it, read this section before you act on that.

Here is the problem. The headlines say health care. The statutes say these specific professions. And the lists are written by and for physicians.

There are two drafting styles, and which one your state used decides everything:

Enumerated lists. The statute names licensing boards or job titles, and only those are covered. This is the common approach, and dentistry is frequently absent — not carved out deliberately so much as never added, because the bills grow out of physician and nursing advocacy.

Functional definitions. The statute describes what the person does rather than listing titles: anyone licensed to provide health care services. This is rarer and much broader, and dentistry generally falls inside it.

We went through the current wave state by state, reading the definitions rather than the summaries. As of July 2026:

State	Law	Effective	Dentists included?
Colorado	SB 25-083	Aug 6, 2025	Yes — "practice of dentistry" is named
Utah	HB 270	May 6, 2026	Yes — "Dentist" is one of 34 named categories
Maine	L.D. 2200	Jul 13, 2026	Very likely — functional definition, dentistry not named
Virginia	SB 128	Jul 1, 2026	No — six boards named, Board of Dentistry omitted
Pennsylvania	Act 74	Jan 1, 2025	No — MDs, DOs, CRNAs, CRNPs, PAs only
Montana	HB 198 / HB 620	2025 / Jan 1, 2026	No — nurses, PAs, naturopaths, then physicians
Indiana	SB 0475	Jul 1, 2025	No — physicians only
Oregon	SB 951	Jun 9, 2025	No — "medical licensees"

Five of eight leave dentistry out. Two name it outright, and those two — Colorado and Utah — are now among the strongest states in the country for dental associates, because in both the covenant is void rather than merely capped.

Automated search answers get this wrong regularly. Ask a search engine whether Virginia's 2026 ban covers dentists and you may well be told that it does, with dentistry named directly in the summary. The statute lists the Boards of Medicine, Nursing, Counseling, Optometry, Psychology and Social Work. Dentistry is not there. Neither are Pharmacy or Physical Therapy.

How to check your own state in about two minutes. Pull up the statute rather than an article about it, find the definitions section, and search it for the word dentist or dentistry. If the law enumerates professions and dentistry is not among them, the ban does not reach you regardless of what the headline said. If the law defines its scope functionally — anyone licensed to deliver health care services — you are probably inside it, though "probably" is doing real work in that sentence and a local attorney can tell you how your state's courts have read it.

The cost of getting this backwards is not abstract. Dentists who believe a ban covers them turn down positions they could have taken, or open inside a restricted radius on the assumption the clause is dead. Dentists who believe it does not cover them, in Colorado or Utah, keep honoring a covenant that is void and stay somewhere they could have left.

States that have banned or nearly banned non-competes

California is the strongest. Non-competes are void and unenforceable, period. As of January 1, 2026, California added a new provision that explicitly voids non-competes for management of physician or dental practices after acquisition by private equity groups or hedge funds. If you practice in California, your non-compete is not worth the paper it's printed on. DSOs operating in California know this, which is why some try to get dentists to agree to choice-of-law clauses selecting a different state's law. Courts haven't fully settled whether that tactic works.

Oklahoma bans non-competes outright. They're void as a matter of public policy.

North Dakota also bans non-compete agreements for employees.

Minnesota banned non-competes effective July 1, 2023. Agreements signed after that date are void and unenforceable.

If you practice in one of these four states and your contract contains a non-compete, it's almost certainly unenforceable. But "almost" is doing some work in that sentence. If your contract has a choice-of-law provision selecting another state, or if the employer's headquarters is in a different jurisdiction, it gets more complicated. Worth a conversation with an attorney if you're in this situation.

---

The Texas game-changer: SB 1318

Texas deserves its own section because the law changed significantly in 2025 and many dentists haven't caught up yet.

Senate Bill 1318, signed by Governor Abbott in June 2025 and effective September 1, 2025, now applies specifically to dentists (previously these restrictions only covered physicians). For any non-compete signed or renewed after September 1, 2025, three hard limits apply:

One-year maximum duration. The non-compete cannot restrict you for more than one year after termination.

Five-mile radius maximum. The geographic restriction cannot exceed five miles from your primary practice location.

Mandatory buyout option. The agreement must give you the option to buy out of the non-compete, and the buyout price cannot exceed your total annual salary and wages at the time of termination.

This is a massive shift. If you're a dentist in Texas with a contract signed before September 2025, the old rules still apply until your contract renews. But the moment it renews after that date, SB 1318 kicks in. If your current non-compete says 2 years and 15 miles, it becomes 1 year and 5 miles at renewal. Check your renewal date.

For dentists signing new contracts in Texas right now, any non-compete that exceeds these limits is unenforceable on its face. If your employer is still handing out contracts with 2-year, 15-mile non-competes, they either haven't updated their templates or they're hoping you don't know the law changed.

---

States that enforce non-competes with "reasonableness" tests

The majority of states fall into this category. Non-competes are enforceable, but only if the terms are reasonable in scope, duration, and geographic area. Courts evaluate them on a case-by-case basis, balancing the employer's legitimate business interest against the dentist's right to earn a living.

What "reasonable" usually means for dental associates:

Duration: 1-2 years is generally upheld. Beyond 2 years is increasingly difficult for employers to defend, especially for associate dentists (as opposed to practice sale situations, where longer terms are more commonly enforced).

Radius: 5-15 miles from the practice location is typical. Urban areas tend to see smaller enforceable radiuses because a 15-mile radius in New York City covers millions of potential patients, while the same radius in rural Texas might cover a handful. Courts consider population density, patient travel patterns, and the availability of other dental providers in the area.

Scope: The restriction should cover the type of dentistry you actually practiced, not all healthcare. A non-compete preventing a general dentist from practicing orthodontics would likely be struck down as overbroad.

Key states in this category: Florida, Georgia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Illinois, New Jersey, North Carolina, Virginia, Washington, and most others. Each has its own case law and statutory nuances.

Some states in this group give courts the power to "blue pencil" or modify overly broad non-competes rather than throwing them out entirely. This means even if your non-compete is unreasonable as written, a court might narrow it to what it considers reasonable and enforce the modified version. Other states take an all-or-nothing approach, where an unreasonable non-compete is simply void.

---

What to actually check in your non-compete

Knowing your state's general stance is step one. Step two is reading the specific language in your contract. Here's what to look for:

Distance measurement. Does it say "miles" or "miles as the crow flies" or "driving distance"? Straight-line distance covers a much larger area than road distance. If it doesn't specify, assume the employer will argue for whichever interpretation benefits them.

What triggers the restriction. Does the non-compete apply if you're terminated without cause? In some states and under some contracts, getting fired doesn't activate the non-compete. In others, it applies regardless of how you leave. This matters enormously.

Which locations. Does the radius apply to your primary office, or to every location the employer operates? If you work at one office but occasionally cover at another location 30 miles away, does that second location create its own non-compete zone? I've seen contracts where covering a single shift at a satellite office expanded the restricted area by hundreds of square miles.

Buyout provisions. Some contracts include a buyout clause that lets you pay a fee to waive the non-compete. If your contract has one, check whether the amount is reasonable. If it doesn't have one, consider asking for one during negotiation. Texas now requires a buyout option by law; other states don't, but it's still a useful term to negotiate.

Liquidated damages. Some contracts specify a dollar amount you owe if you violate the non-compete. Courts generally enforce these if the amount is a reasonable estimate of the employer's actual damages. If the amount seems punitive rather than compensatory, it may not hold up.

---

Non-competes in practice sales vs. employment

One important distinction: non-competes work differently when you're selling a practice versus when you're an employee.

Courts are significantly more willing to enforce non-competes in the context of a practice sale, because the buyer has paid real money for the goodwill of the practice, and allowing the seller to immediately open a competing office nearby would undermine the value of what was purchased. Longer durations (3-5 years) and larger radiuses are more commonly upheld in sale situations.

For associate employment contracts, courts are more protective of the dentist's right to work. The employer didn't buy your practice. They hired you. The bar for enforcing a non-compete against an employee is higher than against a seller.

If someone tells you your associate non-compete is "standard" with a 3-year duration, they might be confusing associate terms with practice sale terms. Those are not the same thing.

---

What you can do right now

Step 1: Identify your state's rules. Use the state-specific pages linked below. Each one covers the current law, enforceability standards, typical clause language, and what courts have ruled.

Step 2: Read your actual clause. Not the summary you remember from signing day. The actual language. Check the duration, radius, measurement method, triggering events, and which locations are covered.

Step 3: Grade your full contract. The non-compete is one piece of a larger picture. DentalUnlock's free contract review grades your agreement on 8 dimensions, including the non-compete, in under 60 seconds. You'll see immediately whether your restriction is typical for your state or an outlier.

Step 4: Negotiate before you sign. Non-competes are more negotiable than most associates think. Reducing a radius from 15 miles to 10, or a duration from 2 years to 1, is a reasonable ask. Requesting a buyout clause gives you an exit path even if the non-compete is enforceable. And in states like Texas, the law now sets hard ceilings that your contract must comply with.

If you've already signed, know that an unenforceable non-compete is still unenforceable. The contract language doesn't change the law. Many dentists comply with non-competes out of fear even when the clause wouldn't survive a legal challenge. If you're considering leaving and your non-compete feels unreasonable, talk to an attorney in your state before assuming you're stuck.

Grade My Contract — Free →

---

State-by-state guides

Click your state for a detailed breakdown of enforceability rules, relevant statutes, typical contract terms, and what to watch for.

Ban states

California — Non-competes void under Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 16600
Minnesota — Banned effective July 1, 2023
North Dakota — Banned under N.D. Cent. Code § 9-08-06
Oklahoma — Banned under 15 Okla. Stat. § 219A-B

States with major recent reforms

Colorado — Income threshold + trade secret requirement (2022)
Illinois — Freedom to Work Act, income threshold (2022)
Maine — Advance disclosure required (2020)
Massachusetts — 12-month cap + garden leave (2018)
Nevada — Employer-termination voidability (2017)
Oregon — 12-month cap + income threshold (2021)
Texas — SB 1318: 1 year, 5 miles, salary-capped buyout (2025)
Utah — 1-year cap + fee-shifting (2016)
Virginia — Low-wage worker protection (2020)
Washington — 18-month cap + income threshold + garden leave (2020)

All 50 states (alphabetical)

---

Frequently asked questions

Is there a federal ban on dental non-competes?

No. The FTC issued a rule in 2024, courts blocked it, and the agency abandoned its appeal in September 2025. There is no federal ban in effect. Your state's law is what determines whether your non-compete is enforceable.

Which states ban dental non-competes?

California, Oklahoma, North Dakota and Minnesota effectively bar them for employees. Texas is now a strict-cap state rather than a ban state: under SB 1318, any dental non-compete signed or renewed after September 1, 2025 is limited to one year, five miles, and must include a buyout option capped at your annual salary and wages at termination.

How long can a dental non-compete last?

In states applying a reasonableness test, one to two years is generally upheld and anything beyond two years becomes harder for an employer to defend against an associate. Practice-sale non-competes are a different matter, and courts enforce longer terms there far more readily. Texas caps employment non-competes at one year for agreements signed or renewed after September 2025.

Does a dental non-compete still apply if I get fired?

It depends on your state and on the wording of your specific clause. Under some contracts a without-cause termination does not activate the restriction at all; under others it applies no matter how the employment ended. This is one of the highest-impact details in the clause and one of the least often checked.

How is the non-compete radius actually measured?

Check whether your contract measures straight-line distance or driving distance, because the two can differ substantially. A practice 20 road miles away can sit inside a radius measured as the crow flies. If the contract doesn't specify, that ambiguity tends to be resolved in the employer's favor.

Does my state's health care non-compete ban apply to dentists?

Often not. Most of these statutes enumerate specific professions or licensing boards, and those lists tend to be physician-centric with dentistry left off. Of the eight states we checked in the current wave, five omit dentistry — including Virginia and Pennsylvania. Colorado and Utah name dentists explicitly and void the covenant entirely. Maine uses a broad functional definition that dentists very likely fall inside. Read the statute's definitions section and search it for "dentist" rather than relying on the headline or an AI summary, both of which frequently say "health care workers" and leave you to assume you're included.

This is general information about how these clauses are typically written and interpreted, not legal advice about your specific contract.

Before you pay a lawyer

Dental contract review without the $360 attorney bill — how the two options actually compare →