Firm Prevails on Behalf of Firm Client in Non-Compete Dispute

The Business Litigation Session (“BLS”) of Suffolk County Superior Court recently issued an Order vindicating a Firm client’s enforcement of its non-competition agreement with a former high-level employee.  The employee had resigned from her job at the Firm’s client, a global organizational consulting company, to work for a competitor of that company, despite having signed a six-month non-competition agreement.  She then filed suit in the BLS against the Firm’s client, seeking to invalidate the non-compete.  In her motion seeking an injunction barring enforcement of the non-competition agreement, Plaintiff argued that the agreement did not comply with the Massachusetts Noncompetition Agreement Act (“MNAA”), Mass. Gen. L. ch. 149, § 24L and did not promote the Firm client’s legitimate business interests.

On July 29, 2025, after detailed briefing, evidentiary presentations, and a lengthy oral argument in the matter, the Court ruled squarely in favor of the Firm client.  In its opinion, the Court concluded that the Plaintiff was unlikely to succeed on the merits of her claims.  Specifically, the Court found that the non-competition agreement complied with the “garden leave” requirements of the MNAA, and that the agreement also furthered the Firm client’s legitimate business interests in protecting its confidential information, to which the Plaintiff had access during the course of her employment.  For those reasons, the Court denied Plaintiff’s request for an injunction, allowing the Firm’s client to enforce the noncompetition agreement.

Firm attorneys Daniel Cloherty, Victoria Steinberg and Alexandra Arnold represented the Firm’s client in this matter.