Employee's Appeal Seeks Double Damages for $152,323.55 Award
by
Joseph C. Maya on Apr. 19, 2017
Employment Employment Employment Contracts Lawsuit & Dispute Lawsuit
Summary: Blog post about an employment case where an employee seeks to double a large award of damages.
Contact the experienced employment law attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. today at (203) 221-3100 or JMaya@Mayalaw.com
In the case of Duplisse v. Devino, a former employee sued his former employers, alleging that the employers had breached various agreements regarding unpaid compensation. The Superior Court, rendered judgment in favor of the employee in part and in favor of the employers in part, and awarded plaintiff a total of $152,323.55 in damages. Specifically, the court did not find that the employee would be allowed double damages for his employee’s alleged fraud. To prevail in an action for fraudulent misrepresentation, the employee is required to show that he reasonably relied on that misrepresentation. One who, in the course of his business, profession, or employment supplies false information for the guidance of others in their business transactions, is subject to liability for pecuniary loss caused to them by their justifiable reliance upon the information, if he fails to exercise reasonable care or competence in obtaining or communicating the information.
During the course of employee’s employment, the parties entered into various oral agreements under which the employee would receive additional compensation. The employee alleged that in one agreement, an employer offered to pay him an additional $ 10,000 per year if he would forgo working for other parties in addition to his work for the employer and that the employer failed to pay the amount agreed on. On appeal, the employee argued that the trial court improperly found that he failed to prove his claim of fraudulent misrepresentation. The appellate court found that there was no direct evidence that the employer intended not to follow through on his promise and thus plaintiff failed to show any fraud. Another employer argued that the trial court erred in finding an enforceable agreement for commissions based on construction projects completed. The appellate court held that the trial court properly found that a meeting of the minds existed between the parties as to how profit from the construction projects was to be determined; therefore that agreement was enforceable.
The judgment was affirmed. And the original award of $152,323.55 would not be doubled as requested by the employee.
If you feel you have been mistreated by your employer or in your place of employment and would like to explore your employment law options, contact the experienced employment law attorneys today at 203-221-3100, or by email at JMaya@mayalaw.com. We have the experience and knowledge you need at this critical juncture. We serve clients in both New York and Connecticut including New Canaan, Bridgeport, White Plains, and Darien.
Source: Duplissie v. Devino, 96 Conn. App. 673, 902 A.2d 30, 2006 Conn. App. LEXIS 347 (Conn. App. Ct. 2006)
