As reported by Law360, a Philadelphia-based law firm, Swartz
Campbell LLC, recently sued a competing Philadelphia firm, The
Chartwell Law Offices LLP, alleging that Chartwell essentially
stole one of Swartz's offices located in Fort Myers, Florida,
including a partner and two employees. Swartz contends that
the partner is subject to a partnership agreement that requires a
four-month notice before he can leave the firm, but the partner
provided notice and left Swartz in July. He allegedly took
an associate, a paralegal, and the office's electronic
files with him. The partner also allegedly has contacted his
clients about his transition. Swartz alleges that Chartwell
knew about the partnership agreement and went ahead with the plan
anyway. It has brought multiple claims against
Chartwell, including for tortious interference, unfair
competition, misappropriation, and civil conspiracy.
Although the case apparently does not involve a noncompete
agreement, it raises an interesting question: can lawyers agree not
to compete with one another? In general, the answer in
Massachusetts is no. Massachusetts Rule of Professional Conduct
5.6(a) states that "[a] lawyer shall not
participate in offering or making a partnership or employment
agreement that restricts the right of a lawyer to practice after
termination of the relationship, except an agreement concerning
benefits upon retirement." The notes for the rule
explain that the rule protects a lawyer's professional
autonomy and allows clients to choose the lawyers they
want. The rule does not apply when a lawyer sells a law
practice. It's not clear whether the agreement in the
Swartz case would survive this rule because the agreement in
that case apparently only requires notice. But even
if the agreement did survive, a court
might nevertheless view the case as an end run around
the rule and the policies supporting it.
To view Foley Hoag's Massachusetts Noncompete Law
Blog please click
here
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
Specific Questions relating to this article should be addressed directly to the author.
The Departments of Labor, Treasury, and Health & Human Services have issued new guidance on the content requirements for health plan summaries of benefits and coverage ("SBCs").
E-mail can be powerful evidence in a dispute, and whether employers and criminal investigators may use employee e-mail in litigation proceedings is a hot topic. A recent New York federal court decision outlined the current law in this area.
I wrote two years ago about the challenges employers face when an employee attributes his or her misconduct to a disability.
I wrote two years ago about the challenges employers face when an employee attributes his or her misconduct to a disability.
Twitter
Facebook
Digg 
