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.
In 2017, at the outset of her employment, Plaintiff entered into a Non-Competition, Non-Solicitation, Confidentiality and Assignment Agreement (the “2017 Agreement”) containing restrictive covenants including an obligation not to solicit Defendant’s employees. In early 2020, the parties entered into a “Transition Agreement” in which Plaintiff would remain in her position through December 15,...
Select which newsletters you want to receive: Cargo Facts Daily Newsletter - Breaking news published within the last 24 hours The Week from Cargo Facts - A roundup of all stories published duri...