Dentists and veterinarians sign many of the same agreements: an associate contract with a practice, a restrictive covenant, production-based compensation, and often a path to ownership that is described more loosely than it should be.
Under Alabama law the two professions do not sit in quite the same place, and that difference is understand before you sign.
Alabama Code Section 8-1-190(a) voids any contract by which someone is restrained from exercising a lawful profession, trade, or business, unless it fits one of six statutory exceptions. Alabama courts have long read profession to carry particular weight, and have held non-compete agreements generally unenforceable against professionals. The doctrine has been applied to physicians, veterinarians, accountants, and licensed physical therapists.
Veterinarians are on that list. A non-compete in a veterinary associate agreement faces a serious obstacle from the outset, though the analysis still depends on the role and the agreement.
Dentistry is a closer question. It is unambiguously a licensed profession, and the argument that the same doctrine applies is a strong one. But it is an argument rather than a decided point, and a dentist should treat the outcome as genuinely open rather than settled in either direction. That is not a reason to assume the covenant binds you. It is a reason not to assume anything without reading it properly.
The useful question is not whether the clause looks enforceable. It is what the clause would stop you doing, and whether that restriction can survive Section 8-1-190.
Section 8-1-190(b)(5) handles solicitation of current customers under its own exception, with its own presumption: 18 months, or as long as post-separation consideration is paid, whichever is greater, is presumed reasonable. Whether such a clause survives against a professional where a non-compete would not is something Alabama courts are still working out.
For an associate leaving a practice, this is often the clause that matters, because it governs contact with patients and clients rather than geography. Our guide to non-compete enforceability in Alabama covers both in more detail.
Associate compensation is usually tied to production, collections, or some blend. The formula matters less than the definitions underneath it, and that is where associate agreements most often disappoint:
Reviewing an associate or employment agreement?
Our contract review service reads the whole agreement, explains every major provision in plain English, and gives you specific recommended changes. You decide what to do with them.Many associate agreements gesture at future ownership. A path to partnership described as to be determined, or subject to further agreement, commits nobody to anything. If ownership is part of why you are taking the role, it is fair to ask for specifics before signing: the valuation method, the timeline, what triggers the offer, and what happens if it never comes.
This is also where business succession planning and contract work start to overlap, particularly for an owner on the other side of the table structuring how an associate eventually buys in.
Associate agreements tend to sit at the shorter end, which usually keeps cost down. The figure still depends on stakes, whether negotiation is wanted, and how quickly it is needed, and it is agreed before any work begins. What drives contract review cost.
Often they are not. Alabama Code Section 8-1-190(a) voids contracts restraining a lawful profession, and Alabama courts have expressly applied that doctrine to veterinarians alongside physicians, accountants, and licensed physical therapists. A restrictive covenant in a veterinary associate agreement therefore faces a real obstacle, though the analysis still depends on the specific role and agreement.
That is less settled than it is for veterinarians. Dentistry is unambiguously a licensed profession and the argument that the same doctrine applies is a strong one, but Alabama courts have not addressed dentistry the way they have physicians and veterinarians. A dentist should treat the outcome as genuinely open rather than assuming the covenant either binds them or does not.
Not by design. Section 8-1-190(a) voids restraints on a lawful profession without listing which occupations count, so the question of what qualifies as a profession has been worked out by the courts case by case. Veterinarians have been addressed directly. Dentistry has not, which leaves an argument by analogy rather than a decided point.
The compensation definitions first. Whether you are paid on production or collections, what is deducted before your percentage applies, how insurance write-offs are handled, whether unpaid production survives your departure, and who controls scheduling. After that: the restrictive covenants, termination and notice, insurance and tail coverage, and any repayment clause on a signing bonus.
Production counts the work you perform. Collections count the money the practice receives for it. Under a collections model you carry some of the risk when a bill goes unpaid or an insurer writes an amount down. Neither is inherently better, but the agreement should say clearly which applies and what is deducted before your percentage is calculated.
Before signing is when your leverage is highest and changes are cheapest. Review after signing is still useful, because it establishes what your notice obligations are, what the restrictive covenant restricts, and what your options look like before you take a step that affects your rights.
It is a separate question from the non-compete, with its own statutory exception under Section 8-1-190(b)(5) and its own presumption of reasonableness at 18 months, or as long as post-separation consideration is paid, whichever is greater. Whether such a clause survives against a professional where a non-compete would not is an area Alabama courts are still working out.
Whether it is defined. A path to ownership described as to be determined or subject to further agreement commits nobody. If ownership is part of why you are taking the role, ask for the valuation method, the timeline, what triggers the offer, and what happens if it never arrives. Those are fair questions before signing rather than after.
That depends on the assignment and change of control language. Some agreements allow the practice to transfer the contract, and the restrictive covenant with it, to a buyer. In a market where group acquisitions are common this is worth checking before you sign rather than discovering afterwards.
Yes. We review employment, associate, and contractor agreements across licensed professions. The core questions are the same each time: what the restrictive covenants actually restrict, how compensation is calculated, what the termination and notice terms require, and what insurance or repayment obligations follow you out the door.
It depends, and we will tell you what it depends on rather than hiding the ball. Four things drive the number: the length of the document, what is at stake if it goes wrong, whether you want negotiation or just understanding, and how fast you need it. We explain the expected scope and cost at the consultation, before any work begins.
This article is general information about Alabama law, not legal advice about your agreement. Restrictive covenant questions are fact-specific, and how Alabama courts treat a particular profession can depend on the role and the agreement.