Rosnov v. Molloy
460 Mass. 474
| Mass. | 2011Background
- Elena Rosnov, an attorney, worked for Molloy from Feb 2006 to Jun 2006, with a 40% referral-fee arrangement on contingent fees Rosnov referred.
- A 2.5 million case Rosnov referred reached partial settlement; Molloy received $432,500 in attorney's fees.
- Rosnov sued Molloy on April 17, 2007, alleging breach of contract and Wage Act violations and sought a portion of fees.
- Trial was bifurcated; liability on contract determined by jury, damages reserved for later review; contract damages set at 40% of $432,500.
- In 2009 the jury found a valid oral contract and Molloy breached by not paying; the trial judge later considered treble damages under § 150 and applied the 2008 amendment.
- The Superior Court judge awarded Rosnov treble damages under the amended statute; Molloy appealed to direct appellate review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Retroactivity of the 2008 amendment | Rosnov argues retroactive application is warranted. | Molloy argues amendment applies prospectively only. | Amendment applies prospectively; not retroactive. |
| Whether the amendment alters substantive rights or remedies | Treble damages exist as damages in 2007 and amendment clarifies entitlement. | Amendment increases liability, thus substantive rights。 | Exaction of treble damages is substantive; not retroactive. |
| Legislative intent regarding retroactivity | Legislative history indicates retroactive intent. | No explicit retroactive directive; intent is murky. | No unequivocal legislative intent for retroactivity; prospective only. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wiedmann v. Bradford Group, 444 Mass. 698 (2005) (treble damages discretionary prior to amendment)
- Fontaine v. Ebtec Corp., 415 Mass. 309 (1993) (retroactivity limits for remedial/statutory amendments)
- Landgraf v. USI Film Prods., 511 U.S. 244 (1994) (framework for retroactive application of statutes)
- Cudlassi v. MacFarland, 304 Mass. 612 (1939) (amendment not retroactive to pre-enactment conduct)
- Fleet National Bank v. Commissioner of Revenue, 448 Mass. 441 (2007) (prospective operation absent explicit retroactive directive)
- Sentry Fed. Sav. Bank v. Co-operative Cent. Bank, 406 Mass. 412 (1990) (statutory retroactivity presumption unless explicit intent)
- Goodrow v. Lane Bryant, Inc., 432 Mass. 165 (2000) (treble damages as punitive; requires explicit statute)
- Gray v. Commissioner of Revenue, 422 Mass. 666 (1996) (statutory construction and retroactivity principles)