Representative Results

The following is a representative sample of the Firm’s results on recent matters by practice area:

Recruitment Law

  • The Firm represented a financial advisor in connection with her resignation from a brokerage firm to join a competing brokerage firm. The advisor's former firm filed an action in Massachusetts Superior Court seeking an injunction enforcing the financial advisor's non-solicitation and confidential information protection agreements with the brokerage firm. Despite the existence of these contractual restrictions, Manchel & Brennan convinced the Court that the former brokerage firm failed to satisfy its burden of proving a likelihood of success on the merits and, therefore, the Court denied, in its entirety, the former brokerage firm's motion for injunctive relief.
  • The Firm initiated litigation on behalf of a client in pursuit of a senior management-level employee who resigned and went to work for a competitor in direct violation of his non-compete and non-solicit obligations. Immediately after initiating the litigation, the employee agreed to the entry of an injunction enforcing his non-compete and non-solicit obligations.
  • The Firm represented two financial advisors in connection with their resignation from a brokerage firm to join a competing brokerage firm. The advisors’ former firm filed an action in Massachusetts Superior Court seeking an injunction enforcing the financial advisors’ non-solicitation and confidential information protection agreements with the brokerage firm. Despite the existence of these contractual restrictions, Manchel & Brennan convinced the Court that the former brokerage firm failed to satisfy its burden of proving a likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm and balancing of the equities. Accordingly, the Court denied the former brokerage firm’s motion for injunctive relief, in its entirety.
  • On behalf of its client, an investment management company, the Firm filed an action in Massachusetts Superior Court alleging that two of its former employees conspired with two corporate entities to unlawfully solicit business from its customers and to recruit other employees to a newly-formed competitor who had ties to these two corporate entities. Although the former employees had no restrictive covenant agreements with the investment management company, the Firm asserted claims of breach of fiduciary duty, tortious interference with contractual and beneficial relations, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and violations of M.G.L. Chapter 93A. All of the defendants moved to dismiss the action. The Court agreed with Manchel & Brennan’s opposition to the motions, and denied all of the defendants’ motions in their entirety.
  • The Massachusetts Superior Court granted the Firm’s motion for a preliminary injunction requiring the defendant, a former employee of the Firm’s client (a high tech company), to return any confidential or proprietary information and enjoining the defendant for one year from soliciting business from any customer or any potential customer whose name became known to defendant during his employment. The former employee appealed the decision to a Single Justice of the Massachusetts Appeals Court. The Single Justice affirmed the entry of the preliminary injunction, with only a minor modification.
  • On behalf of a national insurance company, the Firm sought and obtained emergency injunctive relief in the United States District Court for the District of Texas, pursuant to which a group of departed agents and registered representatives were enjoined from soliciting customers of their former employer and were further ordered to return all removed documents and information.
  • The Firm represented several affiliated financial services companies in a dispute with a number of agents who left to join a competitor. The Firm filed an action in New York state court seeking the return of, and promise not to use, certain confidential, business information. After a chamber conference with the judge, the former agents entered into a formal Stipulation agreeing to the relief requested by the Firm.
  • The Firm filed an action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois seeking a temporary restraining order against agents seeking the return of, and promise not to use, confidential, business information, and seeking to enforce restrictions on their communications with clients. The Court granted the Firm’s request and entered the proposed order submitted by Manchel & Brennan. The dispute proceeded to arbitration where, on the eve of a preliminary injunction hearing, the agents and their new broker-dealer agreed to a stipulation and order precluding them from soliciting any client they previously serviced.
  • The Firm represented several affiliated companies in a dispute with a former manager who had recruited the companies’ advisors to leave and join him at a competitor. The Firm initiated an action in Missouri state court to enforce the non-recruitment and other covenants contained in the contracts with the companies. The Court granted the Firm’s request for a preliminary injunction.
  • The Firm’s clients, several affiliated financial services companies, learned that a number of financial advisors were planning to leave in a manner inconsistent with their contractual and common law obligations, including a plan to remove and use confidential information. The Firm initiated an action in Connecticut Superior Court and obtained an ex parte temporary restraining order enjoining the financial advisors from completing their plans. The financial advisors were simultaneously terminated and served with the restraining order.
  • The Firm represented several affiliated insurance companies in a dispute with an agent who had left to join a competitor. The Firm initiated an action in Michigan state court to enforce the restrictive covenants contained in its contracts with the agent. The Court granted the Firm’s request for a temporary restraining order.