Virginia Court Limits Enforcement of Non-Compete on Employee Solicitation

Ruling distinguishes between solicitation of customers and fellow employees under state law

Published on Feb. 21, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

The Virginia Court of Appeals ruled that employers can bar former employees from soliciting customers but not fellow employees under state law. The court found that while the law allows employers to prohibit former employees from soliciting customers, it prevents the enforcement of non-compete agreements that attempt to halt the solicitation of other employees.

Why it matters

This ruling provides clarity on the enforceability of non-compete agreements in Virginia, particularly around the solicitation of customers versus employees. It highlights the balance the state is trying to strike between protecting employer interests and preserving worker mobility.

The details

James R. Barrera Jr., a former employee of Sentry Force Security, started his own security company and began soliciting customers, clients and fellow employees while still employed at Sentry Force. When Sentry Force sought to enforce a non-solicitation agreement, Barrera argued that Virginia law prevented its enforcement. The Alexandria Circuit Court agreed, but the appeals court reversed in part. The court ruled that Sentry Force could bar Barrera from soliciting its customers, but it could not enforce a non-compete agreement that prevented him from soliciting its other employees.

  • In May 2021, Barrera started working for Sentry Force and signed a non-solicitation agreement.
  • In August 2023, Sentry Force discovered that Barrera had established his own security company and terminated him.

The players

James R. Barrera Jr.

A former employee of Sentry Force Security who started his own security company and began soliciting customers, clients and fellow employees.

Sentry Force Security

A private security firm that sued Barrera for breach of contract after he left the company and started his own firm.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“This statute was intended to protect the rights of low-wage workers and leave them free to compete with their former employer. Instead, the court weaponized the language against workers.”

— Chapman Petersen, Attorney for Barrera (valawyersweekly.com)

What’s next

The judge in the case will decide on Tuesday whether or not to allow Barrera out on bail.

The takeaway

This case highlights the ongoing tension between employers' desire to protect their customer relationships and workers' right to seek new opportunities. The court's ruling provides guidance on the limits of non-compete agreements in Virginia, favoring worker mobility over absolute customer protection.