On August 29, 2024, Judge Squires-Lee of the Business Litigation Session (BLS) of the Suffolk Superior Court granted a motion brought by B&B on behalf of Glenn Frank, a financial adviser. Mr. Frank has nearly four decades of experience and enjoys local and national prominence in his industry, including through his book, Your Encore: How to Balance Time, Money and Happiness During Retirement, podcasts, and articles.
When Mr. Frank joined a local financial advising firm in 2010, he brought dozens of clients with him. That firm was acquired by the defendant national firm in 2019, which then required employees, including Mr. Frank, to sign restrictive covenants that, if enforced, would prevent the employees from soliciting or even working for their own, long-term clients. In other words, clients whom Mr. Frank has advised for decades would be forced to remain with the national firm and could not choose to follow Mr. Frank. Massachusetts law, however, prohibits employers from enforcing restrictive covenants whose purpose is to usurp the good will of their employees.
Over the past several years, the national firm has taken various steps to reassign Mr. Frank’s clients to younger advisers over his objection. In January, the firm unilaterally cut Mr. Frank’s hours and salary in half, prompting Mr. Frank to file suit. Mr. Frank is represented by Michaela May, Todd Bennett and Zachary Hammond.
“[T]o the extent that the [non-solicitation] provision applies to customers . . . whom Frank worked with prior to [his employment] and who he brought to [his employer, the employer] has no legitimate interest business in preventing Frank from working with these clients,” Judge Squires-Lee stated. The court held that the restrictive covenants are likely overbroad and unenforceable as to Frank’s long-term clients. “Any good will Frank has with these clients belongs to him,” the Court added.
Judge Squires-Lee also held that the provisions were overbroad, and therefore invalid, as to customers and prospective customers that Mr. Frank did not actually work with. Again, the employer had no legitimate business interest in preventing Mr. Frank from working with those individuals.
