Where a plaintiff has asserted claims under G.L.c. 151B and the Massachusetts Wage Act, a motion to dismiss should be denied despite the defendants’ argument that the plaintiff’s alleged contacts with Massachusetts are insufficient to establish that Chapter 151B and the Massachusetts Wage Act apply.
“Plaintiff Craig Wilson, Jr., a former employee of Recorded Future, Inc. (‘Recorded Future’), brings this action against Defendants Recorded Future, Christopher Ahlberg, and Scott Almeida. … Relevant here, Wilson brings a claim against Recorded Future for violations of the Massachusetts Fair Employment Practices Law, G.L.c. 151B, §4(1B) (‘Chapter 151B’) (Count II) and against all Defendants for violations of the Massachusetts Wage Act, G.L.c. 149, §148 (‘Massachusetts Wage Act’) (Count III). … Now pending before the court is Defendants’ Partial Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 14] these two claims. …
“Defendants’ argument for dismissal of Wilson’s claims under Chapter 151B and the Massachusetts Wage Act is twofold. First, Defendants contend that whether an out-of-state employee can invoke the protections of either statute turns on Massachusetts’s functional choice-of-law principles, under which an employee’s rights are generally determined by the law of the state that has the ‘most significant relationship’ to his employment. … Second, Defendants argue that Virginia, not Massachusetts, was the ‘locus of [Wilson’s] relationship’ with Recorded Future and that...
You don't have permission to access "http://www.wzzm13.com/article/news/investigations/feds-battle-creek-man-used-fake-organizations-secure-irs-check/69-633e6ea1-dc1b-4ce8-85aa-a4162f4f6185" on th...