Legal Opinion
Pettingell v. Morrison, Mahoney & Miller
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided December 10, 1997PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWilkins, C.J.
On August 13, 1993, the plaintiffs, Richard H. Pettingell and Joseph A. Regan, withdrew as partners in the Boston law firm of Morrison, Mahoney & Miller (firm) and formed their own law partnership. In this action they seek the payment of funds that they assert are due to them as partners voluntarily withdrawing pursuant to the firm’s partnership agreement. The firm disagrees that the claimed funds are due, citing the partnership agreement provision that, if a partner withdraws from the firm and competes with it, the partner forfeits those funds. The plaintiffs respond that the forfeiture…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Jacob v. Norris, McLaughlin & MarcusSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1992
- Howard v. BabcockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
- All Stainless, Inc. v. ColbyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974
- Meehan v. SHAUGHNESSY COHENMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1989
- Denburg v. Flattau & KlimplNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Schoonmaker v. Cummings & Lockwood of Connecticut, P.C.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2000
- Fearnow v. Ridenour, Swenson, Cleere & Evans, P.C.Arizona Supreme Court · 2006
- Pierce v. Morrison Mahoney LLPMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2008
- Markovits v. Venture Info Capital, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2001
- Neuman v. AkmanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1998
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.