On Monday, March 3, 2025, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) heard argument in Miele v. Foundation Medicine, Inc., regarding whether the Massachusetts Noncompetition Agreement Act, G. L. c. 149, § 24L (the “MNAA”), applies to a forfeiture-for-solicitation provision contained in a termination agreement. The outcome of this appeal will clarify the bounds of the recently enacted statute and may have a significant impact on the landscape of restrictive covenants in Massachusetts on the whole.
This appeal challenges the Superior Court’s July 2024 ruling that a contract provision requiring Plaintiff-Appellee to forfeit severance benefits upon breach of non-solicitation obligations was subject to, and prohibited by, the MNAA because it does not satisfy the requirements for an enforceable noncompetition agreement under the statute. The MNAA requires valid covenants to be reasonable in scope of proscribed activities in relation to the interests protected, supported by mutually agreed upon consideration, and consonant with public policy. G. L. c. 149, § 24L.
Blog Editors
Recent Updates
- Term Begins with Easy Unanimity, a Condition Soon to Be Forgotten - SCOTUS Today
- Service and Justice: Veterans in Law – Speaking of Litigation Video Podcast
- Sixth Circuit Says It Again: Outside Counsel’s Internal Investigations Are Privileged and Protected from Disclosure
- Eleventh Circuit Allows Qui Tam Relators to Avoid Complaint Dismissal by Using Information Obtained in Discovery
- EDPA Strengthens Its Approach to White-Collar Enforcement