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
- To Some, It’s About ERISA—to Everyone, It’s About Not Having to Plead Affirmative Defenses - SCOTUS Today
- Deportation Ruling Highlights a Potential Separation-of-Powers Clash - SCOTUS Today
- Another Win for the Administration, at Least for Now - SCOTUS Today
- When Is a TRO Treatable as a Preliminary Injunction? - SCOTUS Today
- Court Sides with RICO Complainant Who Received Tainted Medical Marijuana and with FDA on Regulating E-Cigarettes - SCOTUS Today