Pierce v. Morrison Mahoney LLP

897 N.E.2d 562 (2008)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Pierce v. Morrison Mahoney LLP

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
897 N.E.2d 562 (2008)

  • Written by Sharon Feldman, JD

Facts

The partnership agreement of law firm Morrison Mahoney LLP (Morrison) (defendant) allocated to each partner annual partnership-interest credits (APICs) based on the partnership’s annual net worth. Partners who voluntarily withdrew from the firm forfeited APICs payments if they competed with Morrison after departing. When this forfeiture-for-competition provision was challenged, Morrison adopted an amended agreement that deleted the provision. Under the new agreement, partners who voluntarily withdrew would forfeit their APICs regardless of whether they competed with Morrison after departure. Joel Pierce, John Davis, Elizabeth Fahey, Mitchell King, and Alice Mann (the departing partners) (plaintiffs) withdrew from Morrison and continued to practice law at different firms; none had attained retirement benchmarks, which were defined in the agreement as having reached age 60 or been a partner for 20 years. The departing partners sued Morrison for their APICs payments. The court held that the amended partnership agreement violated Massachusetts Rule of Professional Conduct (RPC) 5.6 and ordered Morrison to pay APICs to the departing partners. Morrison was granted direct appellate review.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Cordy, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 816,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership