Laurilliard v. McNamee Lochner, P.C.
The plaintiffs, minority shareholder employees in a law firm, brought suit against their firm for breaching their employment contracts. The court determined that the plaintiffs were at-will employees and that there was no breach of their agreements when they were terminated. The court also determined that the under-market-value payment under their repurchase agreements was allowable since they were at-will employees.
New York Court Allows Enforcement of Under-Market-Value Buy-Sell and Approves At-Will Termination of Shareholder-Employees
The plaintiffs, minority shareholder employees in a law firm, brought suit against their firm for breaching their employment contracts. The court determined that the plaintiffs were at-will employees and that there was no breach of their agreements when they were terminated. The court also determined that the under-market-value payment under their repurchase agreements was allowable since they were at-will employees.
Weinstein v. Weinstein
In this Vermont divorce case, the Supreme Court affirmed the value of the husband’s law practice even though there was evidence of some potential personal goodwill left in the value determined by the lower court. The Supreme Court also affirmed the wife’s expert’s determination of the husband’s income for maintenance purposes. Note that, per the court, “decisions of a three-justice panel are not to be considered as precedent before any tribunal.”
Vermont Supreme Court Affirms Value of Husband’s Law Practice, Declines to Eliminate Personal Goodwill, Affirms Determination of Husband’s Income
In this Vermont divorce case, the Supreme Court affirmed the value of the husband’s law practice even though there was evidence of some potential personal goodwill left in the value determined by the lower court. The Supreme Court also affirmed the wife’s expert’s determination of the husband’s income for maintenance purposes. Note that, per the court, “decisions of a three-justice panel are not to be considered as precedent before any tribunal.”