Brown & Brown calls it a raid. Howden calls it a lifeboat. A Mass. court will decide.
Beginning on December 18, 2025, Brown & Brown (B&B) managers across New England watched their workforces evaporate in real time. Within a matter of days, the brokerage received approximately 200 resignations from employees stationed in four specific offices, including from local officers in Dedham and Quincy, Massachusetts. All resigning employees gave no notice and accepted employment with Howden US Services, LLC (“Howden”) effective December 19, 2025.
Four days later, on December 22, 2025, Brown & Brown filed a Verified Complaint in the Suffolk Superior Court’s Business Litigation Session (BLS), Brown & Brown, Inc. et al. v. Howden US Services, LLC et al. The suit, besides naming Howden, named 28 of the resigning employees for violating their duty of loyalty while employed by B&B, and breaching their written confidentiality and non-solicitation agreements.
The complaint alleged that the resignations were synchronized by B&B’s own local leadership—specifically naming Profit Center Leaders Eric Kasen and Justin Kesner as the internal coordinators—and were immediately followed by a deluge of Broker of Record (BOR) letters transferring B&B accounts to Howden. It also requested the Court to issue a temporary restraining order enjoining Howden and its new employees from benefiting from the wrongful actions, characterizing the resignations not as organic turnover, but as a “coordinated execution” designed to strip a major brokerage of its assets overnight.
Seal Team Six” and The Mechanics of Deception
The core of Brown & Brown’s lawsuit is the allegation that the raid was planned for months by disloyal managers and producers inside B&B’s offices. The complaint describes a level of operational security typically associated with corporate espionage rather than insurance sales.
B&B alleges that the ringleaders communicated using Signal, an encrypted messaging app, utilizing its “self-destructing message” feature to ensure that evidence of their coordination would vanish. In one of the most telling allegations, B&B claims that the core group of departing executives referred to themselves brazenly as “Seal Team Six,” a moniker implying a precision military-like operation designed to decapitate the rival agency’s leadership and revenue streams.
According to the complaint, the defendants allegedly:
- Ported Company Phone Numbers: B&B alleges that departing employees transferred their B&B-issued cell phone numbers to personal devices or new carrier accounts before resigning.
- Pre-Solicited Clients: The immediate arrival of BOR letters suggests that clients were solicited while the brokers were still employed by B&B and bound by fiduciary duties.
The Contractual Breaches
Brown & Brown is suing to enforce the specific restrictive covenants signed by the 28 named Massachusetts defendants. While agreements varied slightly by tenure, the Brown & Brown of Massachusetts Agreement governing the majority of defendants includes the following strict prohibitions:
- Confidentiality: The employee agrees that B&B’s information is a “valuable economic asset.” The agreement states:
“Unless the Company gives Employee prior express permission, during Employee’s employment and thereafter, Employee shall not use, copy or download for Employee’s own benefit, or use, copy or download for or disclose to any competitor… any Confidential Information to solicit or divert any Insurance Business on behalf of any person or entity other than the Company.”
- Customer Non-Solicitation: For two years post-employment, the employee:
“shall not, directly or indirectly… solicit, accept, take away, propose, sell, provide, service, or divert any Client Account that Employee either was involved in proposing, selling, providing or servicing… or about whom Employee received any Confidential Information.”
- Employee Non-Solicitation: The employee:
“shall not directly or indirectly solicit, hire, engage, or seek to induce any of the Company’s employees to terminate such employee’s employment with the Company for any reason, including, without limitation, to work for Employee or any competitor of the Company.”
A Pattern of “Scorched Earth” Recruitment
This litigation is not an isolated incident. Brown & Brown is the fourth major brokerage to file suit against Howden’s new US operations. The Verified Complaint alleges that Howden has established a pattern of entering the US market not through legitimate acquisition, but by “orchestrating illegal raids,” hiring competitors’ employees en masse to gain access to their accounts.
Similar federal lawsuits currently pending against Howden include:
- Marsh USA LLC v. Parrish et al. (Howden): Filed July 29, 2025, in the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:25-cv-6208). B&B’s complaint notes that Marsh lost over 100 employees (other reports suggest up to 150) and substantial client accounts before obtaining an injunction.
- Willis Americas Administration, Inc. v. Howden: Filed October 2, 2025, in the District of New Jersey (Case No. 3:25-cv-16217).
- Aon Risk Services Companies, Inc. v. Howden: Filed December 11, 2025, in the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:25-cv-10275-ER).
The Legal Response: The December 29th Restraining Order
On December 29, 2025, the Massachusetts Superior Court issued a “Consented-To Temporary Restraining Order” (TRO). While TROs typically expire after ten days, this order has been extended by the court pending an evidentiary hearing.
The Order places strict prohibitions on Howden and the individual defendants to preserve the status quo:
1. Restrictions on Solicitation and Servicing
- Employees: Defendants are enjoined from soliciting, hiring, or inducing any current B&B employees to leave.
- Customers: Defendants are generally prohibited from soliciting or servicing any client accounts they handled during their last 24 months at B&B.
- The “Broker of Record” Exception: In a critical carve-out, the Court ruled that Howden may continue to service clients who had already signed a Broker of Record (BOR) letter as of 5:00 p.m. on December 29, 2025. Any BORs received after that deadline are effectively frozen.
2. Mandates Regarding Information and Property
- Return of Documents: Within seven days, defendants must return all B&B confidential information, whether printed, emailed, or downloaded.
- Return of Devices: The defendants are ordered to immediately return all company devices, including cellular phones, explicitly covering those that were “migrated” to personal possession.
3. Preservation of Evidence
- Addressing the “Signal” allegations, the Court specifically ordered the defendants to disable any “disappearing messages” or auto-delete functions on their communication platforms to ensure data preservation for the lawsuit.
What Comes Next
The legal battle is far from over. The Court has scheduled a status conference for January 12, 2026, at 2:00 p.m. via Zoom.
The purpose of this conference is not to hear the merits of the case, but to decide the “timing, scope, and contour of an evidentiary hearing on the Plaintiff’s motion for a Preliminary Injunction as well as the Plaintiff’s motion for expedited discovery.”
We will keep you informed of the progress of this high-stakes litigation.
