Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Dissolution and Restrictive Covenants

By Peter A. Mahler on December 7, 2007
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

Under the Mohawk Maintenance doctrine, named after a case decided by New York’s highest court, the seller of a business including its good will is under an implied covenant not to solicit the seller’s former customers. Yet to be decided by the same court, although it’s come close on a couple of occasions, is whether a stock buyout resulting from an election to purchase in a dissolution proceeding likewise triggers the implied covenant. The key issue in these cases in whether the sale is deemed to be one “under compulsion” and therefore not within the Mohawk Maintenance rule. Lower court decisions have been less than uniform in their approach and the results.

A dissolution case decided earlier this year raised the issue anew in an interesting context. In Matter of Autz, 16 Misc 3d 1140(A) (Sup Ct Nassau County 2008), the antagonists were minority and majority shareholders in a professional corporation that operated walk-in medical clinics. The petitioner sought dissolution as an oppressed minority shareholder under Section 1104-a of the Business Corporation Law (BCL). The majority shareholder did not elect to purchase the petitioner’s shares. Rather, he consented to dissolution and asked the court (a) to determine that the corporation is not a going concern, and (b) to order a liquidation sale of the corporation’s hard assets and the division of its receivables. The petitioner sought a sale of the corporation as a going concern, inclusive of good will, along with a determination that such a sale is voluntary and therefore imposes a restrictive covenant upon the unsuccessful shareholder-bidder.

In a decision by Justice Leonard B. Austin of the Nassau County Supreme Court, Commercial Division, the court ruled that there was evidence that the corporation had saleable good will, but that a transfer of shares resulting from an involuntary dissolution, in the absence of an election to purchase the petitioner’s shares for fair value under BCL Section 1118, is a sale under compulsion and thus does not implicate the non-solicitation covenant.

Like so many other issues that come to haunt partners who find themselves embroiled in business divorce litigation, covenants not to compete or to solicit customers and employees are most efficiently dealt with in a shareholders agreement made at the beginning of the relationship.

Photo of Peter A. Mahler Peter A. Mahler

Peter A. Mahler is a litigator focusing on business divorce cases involving dissolution and other disputes among co-­owners of closely held business entities, such as limited liability companies, corporations, and partnerships. Peter represents both control and non-control owners, often involving family-owned businesses. Frequently…

Peter A. Mahler is a litigator focusing on business divorce cases involving dissolution and other disputes among co-­owners of closely held business entities, such as limited liability companies, corporations, and partnerships. Peter represents both control and non-control owners, often involving family-owned businesses. Frequently counseling business owners prior to litigation, he advises them of their rights and also assists in designing and negotiating an amicable separation between parties. Peter’s counsel helps avoid litigation by means of a buy-out, sale, or division of business assets.

Read more about Peter A. MahlerEmailPeter A.'s Linkedin ProfilePeter A.'s Twitter Profile
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Business and Commercial
  • Blog:
    New York Business Divorce
  • Organization:
    Farrell Fritz, P.C.
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo