Sample Case Intelligence Report — Non-Compete Enforcement in New York

Sample AI legal research report on enforcing an employee non-compete in New York. Reasonableness analysis under BDO Seidman v. Hirshberg framework.

Sample report. Names and dollar amounts are fictional; legal analysis follows actual federal and state authority.

Fact pattern

Software engineer leaves SaaS company for direct competitor 6 months into a 2-year non-compete. Geographic scope: anywhere in continental US. Duration: 18 months. Employer files for preliminary injunction in NY County Supreme Court.

Outcome forecast

Under BDO Seidman v. Hirshberg, 93 N.Y.2d 382 (1999), New York enforces non-competes only to the extent reasonably necessary to protect a legitimate employer interest, not unreasonably burdensome to the employee, and not injurious to the public. A nationwide geographic scope on a software engineer (no client-facing role) is presumptively overbroad. Court likely blue-pencils to a narrower geographic + temporal scope or denies preliminary injunction outright. Risk score: 38/100 for the employer.

Case strength

Employer must show: (1) protectable interest beyond ordinary competition (trade-secret access, customer relationships), (2) likelihood of irreparable harm without the injunction, (3) balance of equities. Defendant's position is strengthened by the lack of customer-facing role and the breadth of geographic scope. New York's anti-restraint policy weighs against enforcement.

Timeline estimate

PI hearing typically 14-30 days after filing. Decision within 60-90 days post-hearing. If PI denied, employer often drops the case. If PI granted (or partially granted), case proceeds to discovery + summary judgment over 9-12 months.

Generate your own report

Tell us your facts and we'll run the same 8-module analysis on your case in about 3 minutes.

Average generation time: 3 min

Start your report

All sample reports