Physicians hoping to start over elsewhere should pay close attention to the terms of their non-compete agreements, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania recently made clear. In a two to one ruling issued April 24, 2015, the divided panel sided with Geisinger Health System in its effort to enforce a restrictive covenant against a former employee. As a result, defendant Mark M. Radziewicz. D.O. will be enjoined from working at Wilkes-Barre General Hospital for a period of over six months.  (Geisinger Clinic v. Mark M. Radziewicz in the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, No. 505 MDA 2014.)

The Superior Court rejected claims by Dr. Radziewicz that a non-compete provision in his employment contract was inapplicable because his new position – as a hospitalist – differs from that of outpatient primary care physician, the role he fulfilled at Geisinger.  The Superior Court instead found that pursuant to the terms of his non-compete, upon leaving Geisinger Dr. Radziewicz agreed to “restrict” for a period of two years his “practice of medicine” to an area “outside of a 15-mile radius” from Geisinger’s Mountain Top, Pennsylvania office.  The agreement also specified that the non-compete provision would apply to “staff memberships” as well as the “exercise of clinical privileges at any health care facility” within the specified area.

Wilkes-Barre General Hospital is approximately eight miles from Mountain Top, leading Geisinger to file suit against Dr. Radziewicz in December of 2013.  The Montour County Court of Common Pleas rejected Geisinger’s request for an injunction after finding that the plaintiff was unlikely to prevail on the merits of its claim, that Geisinger could still pursue monetary damages in a separate Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas action, and that the balance of harms weighed in favor of Dr. Radziewicz.  In reversing those holdings, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania found that regardless of whether monetary damages could adequately compensate Geisinger, the restrictive covenant should be given full effect because its terms were reasonable.  What’s more, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania ruled, Dr. Radziewicz would not lose his ability to make a living if the restrictive covenant is enforced.

Lastly, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania noted that while the case was pending the restrictive covenant expired.  Over Dr. Radziewicz’s objections, an injunction was issued nonetheless.  Accordingly, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania ruling bars Radziewicz from practicing at Wilkes-Barre General Hospital for six months and three weeks – the period of time remaining on the restrictive covenant at the time Geisinger filed its complaint.

New Jersey Health Care Lawyers at Michelman & Bricker, P.C. Interpret Contracts Carefully

When employment ends it is important to understand the ramifications of all non-compete agreements.  Whether you are seeking to void – or enforce – a restrictive covenant, New Jersey health care lawyers at Michelman & Bricker, P.C. are here to help. Call 215-557-9440 or contact us online to schedule a consultation at one of our offices in Cherry Hill, New Jersey, Longmeadow, Massachusetts or Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.