Pierce v. Morrison Mahoney LLP
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
1Opinion of the CourtCordy, J.
In Pettingell v. Morrison, Mahoney & Miller, 426 Mass. 253, 256 (1997) (Pettingell), we precluded the enforcement of a provision in the Morrison, Mahoney & Miller partnership agreement that “impose[d] adverse consequences on a withdrawing partner” who competed with the law firm. We precluded enforcement because the provision did not impose such adverse consequences on a withdrawing partner who did not compete with the firm. We concluded that the provision violated the public policy of protecting the rights of clients and potential clients to their choice of counsel, as embodied in S.J.C. Rule…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. NiziolekMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985
- Meehan v. SHAUGHNESSY COHENMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1989
- Home Owners Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Northwestern Fire & Marine InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1968
- Fireside Motors, Inc. v. Nissan Motor Corp. in U.S.A.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985
- Miles v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1992
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Bellermann v. Fitchburg Gas & Electric Light Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2014
- Vertex Surgical, Inc. v. Paradigm Biodevices, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2009
- Commonwealth v. Morgan RV Resorts, LLCMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2013
- Matthews v. Nealon (In re Nealon)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · 2015
- Farmer v. Federal National Mortgage Ass'nMassachusetts Superior Court · 2013
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.