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
- AI Medical Technology Meets IP Law in Patent Infringement Suit
- DOJ Civil Division Announces Accelerated Review of FCA Whistleblower Complaints Involving Federally Funded, State-Administered Benefits Programs
- Washington Amends CEMA: Plaintiffs Rush to File Actions Before June 11, 2026 Effective Date
- Five Cases Health Care and Life Sciences GCs Should Keep Watching in 2026
- Protecting Purchased Goodwill: Sale-of-Business Restrictive Covenants Under National Scrutiny