Eccleston Law: For Investors. For Advisors
About
Who We Are
Testimonials
Disclaimers
Attorneys
For Advisors
Broker Transition
Transition Negotiations
Employment Matters
State Registration Problems & Discipline
FINRA Matters
Promissory Note Matters
Team/Parnership Disputes
CFP Board Matters
FINRA Enforcement Matters
State Registration Problems & Discipline
Transition Contract Review
Broker Litigation & Arbitration
Employment Matters
Regulatory Matters
Strategic Consulting
Whistleblower Law
Promissory Note Matters
Compliance Protection
Lawyer Referral Network
Expungement of CRD/BrokerCheck Disclosures
For Investors
Securities Fraud
Breach of Fiduciary Duty
Negligent Investment Management
Unauthorized Trading
Lawyer Referral Network
News & Articles
News
Articles
Financial Counsel Blog
Videos
Newsletter Signup
Contact
Site Menu
About
Who We Are
Testimonials
Disclaimers
Attorneys
For Advisors
For Advisors: Overview
Broker Transition
Broker Transition Overview
Transition Negotiations
Employment Matters
State Registration Problems & Discipline
FINRA Matters
Promissory Note Matters
Team/Parnership Disputes
CFP Board Matters
FINRA Enforcement Matters
State Registration Problems & Discipline
Transition Contract Review
Broker Litigation & Arbitration
Employment Matters
Regulatory Matters
Strategic Consulting
Whistleblower Law
Promissory Note Matters
Compliance Protection
Lawyer Referral Network
Expungement of CRD/BrokerCheck Disclosures
For Investors
For Investors: Overview
Securities Fraud
Breach of Fiduciary Duty
Negligent Investment Management
Unauthorized Trading
Lawyer Referral Network
News & Articles
News
Articles
Financial Counsel Blog
Videos
Newsletter Signup
Contact

SEI Hits Apex with Suit Over Non-Compete

Posted on July 25th, 2018 at 3:55 PM
SEI Hits Apex with Suit Over Non-Compete

This article was originally posted at http://fundfire.com/c/2043973/239963

By Lydia Tomkiw July 25, 2018

SEI Investments has filed suit against Apex Fund Services and former SEI sales director John Lumley, who it claims violated a non-compete agreement by joining a direct rival. SEI is claiming breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, unfair competition, and interference with contractual relations.

SEI accuses Lumley of using “confidential trade secrets” as well as proprietary information to contact prospective customers, both before and after his departure from the firm, in violation of a non-disclosure and non-compete agreement he signed in late 2016.

Lumley served as sales director in SEI’s investment manager services division until his resignation in May 2018 when he joined Apex as head of product, “a position that would directly compete with SEI’s business,” according to the mid-July filing.

The filing alleges Lumley had three meetings with Genstar Capital Management, a firm that has backed recent Apex acquisitions, and that as a result of those meetings Apex CEO Peter Hughes offered Lumley a job.

The filing describes Apex as “a direct competitor of SEI” listing the fields of fund accounting, administrative services, investor relations services, and tax and audit services as services offered by both firms.

Apex declined to comment on the case. SEI, through its attorney, also declined to comment on the case while the matter is in court.

In the filing, SEI managing director James Cipriano stated in an affidavit that the value of Lumley’s “new business pipeline,” along with business SEI is “in jeopardy of losing,” is valued at $12 million.

The non-compete agreement Lumley signed with SEI states that for a period of two years following the termination of his employment he would not “directly or indirectly, either individually or with others, own, manage, operate, join, control, act as consultant to or agent for, or participate in the ownership, management, operation or control of, or be employed by or connected in any manner with, any business…that competes with the business…,” according to the filing.

This type of non-compete is usually employed for high-level employees, says Jim Eccleston, managing member with Eccleston Law, who is not involved in the case.

“This is typical in terms of preventing a high-level employee from removing confidential information and using it and also from competing with his former employer and, finally, with not allowing that person to solicit clients or prospective clients of his former employer,” he says.

One area of such cases that defendants often contest is the non-compete covenant, he adds. “In most states, the covenant not to compete is disfavored by the courts and as a result of that the employer must show the covenant not to compete is reasonable in terms of geographic scope, time, and scope [of] subject matter,” he says.

SEI is seeking an injunction requiring Lumley to comply with the terms of his contract with the firm as well as monetary damages.

Related Attorneys: James J. Eccleston

Tags: james eccleston, eccleston law, eccleston law llc, eccleston, sei, apex

Share

Return to Archive

Latest Articles
Best-Performing Energy Funds Suffered 10-Year Losses
March 1st, 2021 at 12:51 PM
Some Brokers Sold GPB Private Placements Allegedly with the Worst Wall Street Tactics
February 26th, 2021 at 1:32 PM
Read More »
Latest News
CFP Board is the New Sheriff and it Is Not Your Friend
October 24th, 2020 at 10:04 AM
Defending Against a Customer Complaint First Requires Selecting Correct Legal Counsel
October 15th, 2020 at 10:02 AM
Read More »
Share

Request a Free Consultation

Attorneys are standing by during regular business hours. Call us now for immediate service, or complete the form below and we will contact you as soon as possible.

Your E-mail Address:
 
Chicago
55 West Monroe St.
Suite 610
Chicago, Illinois 60603
(312) 332-0000
(312) 332-0003
New York City
One Liberty Plaza
165 Broadway, 23rd Floor
New York, New York 10006
(312) 332-0000
(312) 332-0003
Boca Raton
2255 Glades Road
Suite 324A
Boca Raton, Florida 33431
(312) 332-0000
(312) 332-0003
2021 © Eccleston Law, LLC.
All Rights Reserved.
The law is continuously changing. Please do not rely on information found on this site without consulting a lawyer to determine if any recent changes in the law may have an impact.