Brown & Brown Files Lawsuit Over Ex-VP’s Alleged Client Poaching and Secret Competition
One of the nation's insurance industry giants, Brown & Brown, has taken decisive legal action this week, accusing its former vice president of setting up a covert rival business and poaching clients in violation of employment agreements. The unfolding lawsuit highlights the fierce competitiveness and high stakes within the insurance brokerage world.
According to public filings, Brown & Brown, headquartered in Florida and known as a major player across the United States, filed a federal lawsuit in the Middle District of Florida. The target: Westyn Swenson, a former VP based in Texas, along with Nathan Gilbert Insurance Agency and Legacy Insurance Group. They allegedly conspired to lure at least 37 clients away from Brown & Brown—an action Brown & Brown claims blatantly violated Swenson’s non-compete agreements.
The narrative traces back to 2021, when Swenson worked at Hillco West Texas insurance agency and agreed not to solicit clients if he departed. Yet, the suit alleges Swenson surreptitiously established Swenson Capital specifically to compete with Hillco—even while on their payroll. Brown & Brown acquired Hillco in 2024, inheriting Swenson as their vice president for sales and securing a fresh employment contract with him. Soon after, Swenson departed to join Legacy Insurance Group, which operates in both Florida and Texas and counts Nathan Gilbert’s Iowa Falls, Texas, agency among its branches.
Brown & Brown's complaint details a striking claim: “Since beginning work with the Legacy Defendants ... Swenson has solicited and accepted work involving no less than thirty-seven customer insurance policies he had previously serviced on behalf of Brown & Brown, using misappropriated confidential information, to benefit the Legacy Defendants.” Notably, the company calls Swenson Capital a mere 'smokescreen,' even submitting to the court a Google Maps image revealing the listed business address to be a vacant lot in Nocona, Texas.
From a broader industry context, this case is the latest in a surge of poaching lawsuits, underscoring the value and vulnerability of client relationships and proprietary information in the insurance sector. It comes as some states have begun pushing back on restrictive 'no-poach' agreements—for example, New York authorities levied substantial fines in 2023 against companies for what were deemed “anti-worker” no-poaching deals.
For Brown & Brown, the financial and reputational stakes are high. The company seeks at least $50,000 in damages and a court mandate enforcing compliance with Swenson’s prior agreements. The defendants have yet to respond to the allegations, leaving the industry watching closely to see how the case will proceed and what legal precedents might emerge.
This lawsuit not only spotlights the ongoing battle for clients in a highly competitive marketplace, but also serves as a cautionary tale about the legal and ethical boundaries around trade secrets and employment covenants. Will companies adapt or will such disputes become even more common? Share your thoughts below—how should the industry balance protecting business interests with individual career freedom?