Dual Employment Agreement Bank

Maya Murphy, P.C.`s lawyers are experienced and knowledgeable labour and corporate law practitioners and support clients in New York, Bridgeport, Darien, Fairfield, Greenwich, New Canaan, Norwalk, Stamford, Westport and elsewhere in Fairfield County. If you have any questions regarding your non-compete clause or would like to discuss any element of your employment contract, please contact Joseph C. Maya, Esq by phone. (203) 221-3100 or by e-mail to JMaya@Mayalaw.com. Webster Bank is a regional investment bank in Lower New England that employed Daniel Cahill from April 11, 2995 to February 12, 2009. He was hired as a cashier at the bank`s Bristol, CT office, and promoted in 2001 to financial advisor to webster Investment Services, the securities department of webster Bank. The bank entered into a corporate agreement with UVEST in 2007 and M. Cahill (and other similar staff members) had to sign a double employment contract. The contract contained the terms of his employment and contained several restrictive agreements. Mr. Cahill was prohibited, for one year after his termination, from engaging in concurrent business activities within twenty-five miles of his base of operations and is subject to a permanent confidentiality clause for the confidential and protected information of Webster and UVEST. Mr. Cahill faxed a letter of resignation to Webster on February 12, 2009 and began working the next day for RBC Bank in his Office in Hartford, CT, where he performed essentially the same duties as during his work at Webster.

Webster sued Mr. Cahill in Connecticut State Court for enforcing the restrictive agreements contained in the dual employment contract. Lord. Cahill admitted that RBC was a direct competitor to Webster, that its new office is in the twenty-five mile no-go zone, that it had taken a list of 2,900-3,000 Webster clients and sent a letter of formal notice on RBC`s stationery to all of those clients. Of these calls, 350-400 accounts transferred their assets to RBC, representing a loss of approximately $US 5 million in assets under management for Webster. Mr. Cahill admitted that he had breached the terms of the double employment contract, but argued that the Tribunal should not enforce the non-compete clause, given that he is a “licensed and registered securities dealer and financial representative” and that, therefore, the rules and regulations of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) are regulated and he has done nothing wrong. . . .