Posts tagged "1010413"

Machado, et al. v. System4 LLC, et al. (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-104-13)

NOTICE:  All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.  If you find a typographical error or other formal error, please notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Judicial Court, John Adams Courthouse, 1 Pemberton Square, Suite 2500, Boston, MA 02108-1750;  (617) 557-1030;     SJC‑11175   EDSON TELES MACHADO & others[1]  vs.  SYSTEM4 LLC & another.[2]       Norfolk.     December 4, 2012.  ‑  June 12, 2013. Present:  Ireland, C.J., Spina, Cordy, Botsford, Gants, Duffly, & Lenk, JJ.       Massachusetts Wage Act.  Contract, Arbitration.  Arbitration, Waiver, Damages.  Public Policy.  Federal Preemption.  Practice, Civil, Class action.       Civil action commenced in the Superior Court Department on March 24, 2010.   A motion to stay was heard by Patrick F. Brady, J., and a motion for reconsideration was considered by him.   A proceeding for interlocutory review was heard in the Appeals Court by Andrew R. Grainger, J., and the case was reported by him to the Appeals Court.  The Supreme Judicial Court granted an application for direct appellate review.     Eric H. Karp (Brigid Harrington with him) for the defendants. Shannon Liss-Riordan (Claret Vargas & James W. Simpson, Jr., with her) for the plaintiffs. The following submitted briefs for amici curiae:   Audrey R. Richardson & Donald J. Siegel for Massachusetts AFL-CIO & others. Victoria W. Ni, Leslie A. Bailey, & Spencer J. Wilson, of California, Scott L. Nelson & F. Paul Bland, Jr., of the District of Columbia, & Matthew W.H. Wessler for Public Justice, P.C., & another. Robin S. Conrad, Kate Comerford Todd, & Shane B. Kawka, of the District of Columbia, Alan E. Schoenfeld, of New York, & Mark C. Fleming for Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America. Ben Robbins & Martin J. Newhouse for New England Legal Foundation.     CORDY, J.  The plaintiffs are individuals who have entered into contracts, called “local franchise agreements,” with defendants System4 LLC (System4) and NECCS, Inc. (NECCS) (collectively, defendants), for the provision of commercial janitorial services to third-party customers.[3]  The plaintiffs commenced this action in the Superior Court as a class action, alleging that the defendants misclassified the named plaintiffs and other similarly situated individuals as independent contractors and committed other violations of the Massachusetts Wage Act, G. L. c. 149, §§ 148, 148B, and 150 (Wage Act).  The defendants moved to stay the court proceedings pending arbitration according to the terms of the arbitration clause contained in the parties’ franchise agreements.  A judge in the Superior Court denied the motion, concluding that because the arbitration clause barred class proceedings and prohibited an award of multiple damages, it was invalid […]


Posted by Massachusetts Legal Resources - June 12, 2013 at 11:25 pm

Categories: News   Tags: , , , ,