As previously reported in LFPBR, several states have upheld the forfeiture of non-qualified retirement benefits otherwise payable to a partner choosing to compete with the firm.
NJ Upholds Non-Competition Agreement
As previously reported in <i>LFPBR</i>, several states have upheld the forfeiture of non-qualified retirement benefits otherwise payable to a partner choosing to compete with the firm. In <i>Borteck v. Riker, Danzig, Scherer, Hyland, and Perretti, LLP</i> (A-31-03) (April 5, 2004), the New Jersey Supreme Court unanimously concluded that the retirement provisions of a law firm's partnership agreement did not violate N.J. Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC) 5.6, and held the competing partner to lose his retirement benefits. The case provides further guidance for firms in designing, drafting and defending enforceable forfeiture-for-competition agreements.
This premium content is locked for LawJournalNewsletters subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already have an account? Sign In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.






