Practice Areas


Sherin and Lodgen’s Employment Law Department represents executive, professionals and business clients across a range of industries, providing counseling, negotiation, and complex litigation services.


Our Employment Department is ranked by Chambers USA for “Labor and Employment: Mainly Plaintiff’s Representation” in Massachusetts. As one client noted, “My overall impression of the team is one of superb client service and great value for money. Particular strengths include extraordinary legal knowledge and skills, persistence and a fearless and unwavering commitment.”

Led by Nancy S. Shilepsky and Brian J. MacDonough, the Department has been recognized by Chambers USA and U.S. News and World Reports “Best Law Firms” for excellence in Employment Law. Chambers interviews note, “Nancy is extremely well versed in the law,” reported a recent client. “I have been seriously impressed by the totality of her understanding. Whenever I have chosen not to follow her advice, I have always been wrong” and “I think [Brian’s] extremely smart,” said a client. “I’ve been impressed with all of the materials that he’s drafted for me and with the way he brings in his own knowledge of case law in to bear on my matters.



The firm’s transactional employment practice provides advice and representation to executive and professionals in matters including:

  • Executive and professional employment agreements
  • Short- and long-term incentive arrangements including deferred and equity compensation
  • Non-competition, non-solicitation and non-disclosure agreements
  • Termination and severance protection, including “Good Cause” and “Good Reason” strategies
  • Change in control provisions
  • Post-employment consulting agreements
  • Expatriation agreements

Because of our unique experience navigating and advising on sophisticated and complex employment and compensation terms, many of our clients continue to seek our attorneys’ advice throughout their professional careers.


When disputes arise, clients turn to our litigation attorneys for assistance in high-level, complex litigation work. Our attorneys have significant experience representing clients in state and federal courts and before state and federal administrative agencies in Massachusetts and other states including the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD) and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

Our representation includes pursuing and defending clients in matters concerning:

  • Non-competition and restrictive covenants
  • Trade secret disputes
  • Executive and professional termination disputes, including those in arbitration
  • Disputes between partners and shareholders in closely held corporations
  • Discrimination, sexual harassment, disability and leave issues, including those under Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
  • Wrongful termination and retaliation claims
  • Whistleblower disputes

Our experience falls into three general areas of work:

  • First, we assist executives throughout the careers with what we call the “in deals, stay deals and out deals.”  For example, over the past five years, we have represented a CEO first in his departure from one company, then in his negotiations to join a second company and, most recently, in the re-negotiation of the terms of the agreement with the second company to provide “stay” incentives ahead of an anticipated change of control.  The incentives are tied to the business deal that our client is able to broker for the sale of the company.  We have no doubt that when and if this CEO departs as a result of the change, we will be representing him as he moves forward in his career.
  • Second, we represent executives and employers in employment litigation and arbitrations, as well as partners, minority shareholders, partnerships and closely held corporations.  Our representation of clients includes all stages of litigation from preliminary injunction through trial and appeal. We have particular expertise in the litigation of restrictive covenant matters, such as non-competition and non-solicitation clauses.  Recently, we were asked by a corporate client to help repel the efforts of a competitor to gain an unfair advantage by misuse of restrictive covenants.  We skillfully and aggressively represented our clients’ interests in federal court, resulting in the diminishment of the restrictions.  Our expertise and reputation in such matters may also allow us to help our clients avoid court.  For example, recently, we brokered a deal between an individual client’s former and prospective employers such that our client was able to make an advantageous career move without the uncertainty of possible litigation hanging over her head.
  • Third, many large employers with sophisticated or complex executive compensation plans, including equity and deferred compensation, refer their executives to us because of our known ability to understand and work with those plans.  Thus, for example, we regularly receive such referrals to assist in the negotiation or re-negotiation of employment agreements / consulting agreements for health care executives, and for the recruitment or “retirement” packages for financial services executives.

David I. Brody quoted in Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly on potential liability for ‘OK Boomer’ in the workplace

By David I. Brody on December 09, 2019
David I. Brody, associate in the firm’s Employment Department, was quoted in the December 5th issue of Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly (MLW). His...

David I. Brody and Jaclyn L. McNeely published in CEO Today article on circumstantial evidence

By Sherin and Lodgen on October 23, 2019
Prove It! - legal concept
David I. Brody and Jaclyn L. McNeely, associates in the firm's Employment Department, were recently published in the October issue...

Navigating the Job Interview: Spotting and Responding to Potentially Unlawful Interview Questions

By Brian J. MacDonough and David I. Brody on October 01, 2019
job interview stock photo
Largely gone are the days when employers could blatantly make hiring decisions based upon unlawful factors, like the sign in...

Cases to Watch: United States Supreme Court to Decide Whether Title VII’s Prohibition against Sex Discrimination Protects LGBTQ Individuals

By Brian J. MacDonough on October 01, 2019
red figure standing out in crowd of white figures
The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to hear three cases on October 8, 2019 that will determine whether Title VII’s...

Our “Top Five to Ten” List of Important Recent Cases

By David I. Brody and Nancy S. Shilepsky on October 01, 2019
A blue circle with binoculars on a black background.
In order to keep our readers abreast of recent developments and legal trends, we are continuing our “top five to...