Where a plaintiff has moved for partial summary judgment on his claim that he was misclassified as an independent contractor, that motion should be allowed because the defendants have failed to establish that the plaintiff worked as an independent contractor.
“Plaintiff George Serebrennikov has alleged that he is a former employee of Defendant Proxet Group LLC (‘Proxet’), that his employment was terminated as of July 31, 2022, and that he is owed $22,500 in unpaid salary, a $100,000 bonus, $16,000 for unused vacation days, and over $450,000 for unreimbursed employment-related expenses. … He brings claims against Proxet and its sole member and manager, Defendant Vladimir Medvedovsky, for violation of the Massachusetts Wage Act, M.G.L.c. 149 (‘Wage Act’), and against Proxet for breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. …
“Defendants contend that if the Wage Act applies, Serebrennikov cannot demonstrate that Defendants failed to pay him any wages due. … Specifically, Defendants argue that Serebrennikov cannot recover under the Wage Act the unreimbursed work expenses he claims, payment for unused vacation time, or the $100,000 bonus that he asserts was due at the end of August 2022. …
“Based on his summary judgment filings, Serebrennikov is claiming $273,707.66 in unreimbursed expenses. … Defendants contend that this claim fails where Serebrennikov was reimbursed for every expense he submitted to Proxet. …
“As to almost all of the...
“This has been one of the most difficult and traumatic periods of my life.” It’s pretty wild how quick a lawyer threatening a lawsuit can bring a person, company, whatever, to heel. And Ian Battri...