Fraelick v. PerkettPR, Inc.
989 N.E.2d 517
Mass. App. Ct.2013Background
- Fraelick, an at-will employee of PPR, alleged nonpayment and unreimbursed business expenses under a compensation package.
- PPR allegedly ceased reimbursing expenses in 2009 and delayed payments through 2010, leading Fraelick to raise the issue with PPR president Perkett.
- In February 2011 Fraelick raised expenses underpayments; PPR allegedly fired her on February 8, 2011 for seeking reimbursement.
- The complaint asserted Wage Act claims under §§148 and 148A, plus common-law claims and declaratory relief regarding a nonsolicitation/noncompete agreement.
- Superior Court granted a Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal, holding expenses were not Wage Act wages and that pleading standards were not met.
- On appeal, the court held the complaint plausibly alleged §148A retaliation, declaratory relief on the nonsolicitation clause, and related tort and misrepresentation claims; it reversed as to certain counts and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the complaint plausibly states a Wage Act §148A retaliation claim. | Fraelick's complaint alleges employer penalized her for seeking wages. | Defendants contend expenses are not Wage Act wages and §148A does not apply. | Yes; the claim is plausible under §148A. |
| Whether the complaint plausibly states tortious interference against the individual defendant. | Malice may be inferred from retaliation for wage claims. | Requires actual malice; record fact questions remain. | Yes; plausibility supports the claim at this stage. |
| Whether declaratory relief concerning the nonsolicitation clause is permissible. | Nonsolicitation provision may be unenforceable as overbroad. | Provision should be considered enforceable if reasonable. | Yes; declaratory relief survives and damages may be pursued if unenforceable. |
Key Cases Cited
- Iannacchino v. Ford Motor Co., 451 Mass. 623 (Mass. 2008) (pleading standard; entitlement to relief from allegations presumed true)
- Curtis v. Herb Chambers I-95, Inc., 458 Mass. 674 (Mass. 2011) (pleading standards under Iannacchino; speculative to plausible)
- Smith v. Winter Place LLC, 447 Mass. 363 (Mass. 2006) (protected activity under Wage Act §148A; private enforcement policy)
- Awuah v. Coverall N. America, Inc., 460 Mass. 484 (Mass. 2011) (wages; special contracts; deductions; set-offs; private rights of action)
- Camara v. Attorney Gen., 458 Mass. 756 (Mass. 2011) (invalid wage deductions; prohibition of impermissible special contracts)
- Weems v. Citigroup Inc., 453 Mass. 147 (Mass. 2009) (private wage action purposes; deterrence and compensation)
- Novelty Bias Binding Co. v. Shevrin, 342 Mass. 714 (Mass. 1961) (non-compete enforceability factors; reasonable scope and public interest)
- All Stainless, Inc. v. Colby, 364 Mass. 773 (Mass. 1974) (remedies for partially valid noncompete; damages when enforceability later determined)