Delaware court holds off issuing TRO in Marsh-Howden dispute

The Delaware Court of Chancery said Tuesday it would hold back from ruling on Marsh’s request for a temporary restraining order against rival Howden in a poaching dispute pending decisions in a related earlier action.

In Marsh & McLennan Cos. Inc. v. Howden US Services LLC and Howden US Specialty LLC, filed earlier this month in the Delaware court, Marsh alleged that London-based Howden conspired with former executives in Marsh’s Florida region to poach clients and more than 140 staff.

Marsh previously sued the executives, led by former Florida zone leader Michael Parrish, in federal court in the Southern District of New York, alleging they violated their employment agreements. Howden and the executives had earlier asked a New York state court to rule that the restrictive covenants in the contracts were superseded and overbroad, the Delaware court said.

Howden launched its U.S. retail unit, headed by Mr. Parrish, on Aug. 1.

The New York federal court set a Sept. 4 hearing date and ordered Marsh to show cause why Howden should not be allowed to intervene in the case. Howden is not a defendant in that case.

Howden also seeks to dismiss the Delaware case.

“Expedition is granted for Howden’s proposed motion to dismiss. But that motion should be briefed on a schedule that allows (the New York federal court) to make its decisions, and allows this Court maximum visibility into those decisions,” the Delaware Court said.

Marsh’s motion for the TRO is “held in abeyance” until after a decision in the issues “teed up” for Sept. 4 in New York, it said.

“Marsh came to this Court and sought expedition and injunctive relief without advising this Court that it risked unwittingly stepping on two other courts’ toes, in violation of principles of comity, judicial efficiency, and the avoidance of inconsistent rulings,” the court said.

Marsh declined to comment on the Delaware court order.