Are Non-Competes Enforceable for Dentists and Dental Staff in Michigan?

Yes — and Michigan says so in a statute.

Employee non-competes are governed by MCL 445.774a(1), which lets an employer obtain from an employee a covenant that protects its reasonable competitive business interests, if it is reasonable as to duration, geographical area, and the type of employment or line of business.

The statute speaks to employees generally and its text contains no profession-specific exception, so on this statute's face an associate dentist, a hygienist and a chairside assistant all stand before the same test — and the research for this guide found no Michigan statute singling out dental workers either.

This page is the employer's view.

If you are a dentist weighing a covenant you were handed, that is the worker's side — see our guide to dentist non-compete agreements.

The federal picture: the FTC's 2024 Non-Compete Clause Rule was set aside in court and never took effect, and in a final rule published February 12, 2026 the FTC removed it from the Code of Federal Regulations — so as of October 7, 2026 there is no federal rule banning employee non-competes at a dental practice.

The FTC says it can still challenge individual non-competes case by case under Section 5 of the FTC Act when they are unjustified, overbroad or anticompetitive.

How other states treat dental covenants: see our guide to non-competes for dental staff nationally.

In Michigan, the governing rule is MCL 445.774a — part of the Michigan Antitrust Reform Act (Act 274 of 1984), added by 1987 Act 243; the official MCL page, complete through PA 103 of 2026, shows no later amendment.

The section applies to covenants entered into after March 29, 1985 — in practice, every covenant your practice would sign today.

One scope note: this guide's research covers the statute's text, not the Michigan case law applying it — how courts read "reasonable competitive business interests," or what consideration a mid-employment covenant needs.

Have Michigan employment counsel advise on both.

Nothing in MCL 445.774a's text singles out a profession: it contains no income threshold, no notice requirement and no profession-specific exception.

The research for this guide also found no Michigan statute specifically restricting non-competes for dentists, dental hygienists or other health care workers as of October 7, 2026 — a research finding, not a certification, so counsel can confirm the current state of the law.

Texas, for contrast, makes a non-compete relating to the practice of dentistry unenforceable against a Texas-licensed dentist unless it caps the buyout at no greater than the dentist's total annual salary and wages at termination, expires within one year after termination, covers no more than a 5-mile radius from where the dentist primarily practiced, and states its terms clearly and conspicuously in writing.

No Michigan provision comparable to that was found by this research.

Income gates are another state's creation: Illinois bars non-competes against employees earning $75,000 a year or less, rising to $80,000 on January 1, 2027.

Michigan's statute sets no earnings trigger.

MCL 445.774a(1) asks that the covenant protect a reasonable competitive business interest and be reasonable as to duration, geographical area, and the type of employment or line of business.

Turn each factor into a question you can answer in writing:

• Duration — how long after departure does the restriction run? Tie it to how long the protected relationships stay valuable.
• Geographical area — where does it apply? Set it by where your patients actually travel from.
• Type of employment or line of business — what work is restricted? Say what the person may not do, precisely enough that a stranger could apply it.

The statute states the standard in those three factors; this research did not cover the Michigan decisions applying it — what terms and radii courts accept — so have counsel sanity-check your numbers.

If the clause misses, the statute gives a court a narrowing option: to the extent a covenant is found unreasonable in any respect, a court may limit it to render it reasonable and specifically enforce the agreement as limited.

Contrast California, where a non-compete is void no matter how narrowly tailored — but do not draft broad on purpose: the court's version protects what a judge thinks your business needed, not what you wrote.

This guide's Michigan research covers the non-compete statute, not how Michigan law treats non-solicits — so treat a non-solicit as its own clause, written separately and reviewed by counsel.

For how these clauses are structured, see patient and staff non-solicits.

Confidentiality is the quieter protection.

Under the Defend Trade Secrets Act, a patient list is a trade secret only if the owner took reasonable measures to keep it secret and it has independent economic value from not being generally known — access controls and signed confidentiality terms are the kind of record you would point to.

The DTSA lets the owner of a misappropriated trade secret related to a product or service used in, or intended for use in, interstate or foreign commerce sue in federal court, but an injunction may not prevent a person from entering into an employment relationship, and conditions placed on the new employment must rest on evidence of threatened misappropriation, not merely on the information the person knows.

None of this argues against covenants in Michigan — only for writing them to the statute's test.

• Draft narrow on all three factors. Tie the term to how long the protected relationships last and the area to your patient draw.
• Hand the covenant over with the offer. Michigan's statute imposes no notice requirement — but several states require disclosure before the offer is accepted (Illinois gives employees 14 calendar days to review; Colorado requires a separate signed notice before acceptance) — check the rule if you hire across state lines.
• Adding a covenant mid-employment? Ask counsel about consideration first — that question sits in case law this research did not reach.
• Price training separately. If the real concern is recovering training costs, that is a different tool with its own rules — see our guide to training repayment agreements.
• Confirm licensure at hire. A covenant only matters if the person can practice — our guide to dentist licensure in Michigan covers what Michigan requires.
• Have Michigan employment counsel review the final language before it goes into an offer packet — not after a court is asked to enforce it.