Where a Wage Act judgment has been challenged on appeal, so much of the judgment as denied the plaintiff counsel fees must be vacated, as a remand is necessary for a determination whether the plaintiff was the prevailing party within the meaning of G.L.c. 149, §150.
“The plaintiff, Yari Jusino, appeals from a summary judgment entered by a judge of the Boston Municipal Court in favor of the defendants Massachusetts Chiropractic Center, LLC (MCC), and Boris Sapozhnikov. The plaintiff argues that genuine issues of material fact exist as to whether a check dated June 7, 2019, that the defendants tendered to her represented the full amount of damages they owed her under the Wage Act, G.L.c. 149, §§148, 150. Having carefully reviewed the record before us, we discern no such genuine issue of material fact. The plaintiff further argues that she is entitled to attorney’s fees under the test adopted in Ferman v. Sturgis Cleaners, Inc., 481 Mass. 488, 496 (2019), a question not decided below. We remand only for a determination whether the filing of the complaint was the catalyst for the defendants’ tendering the June 7 check to the plaintiff, and thus the plaintiff was the prevailing party in the Wage Act action within the meaning of G.L.c. 149, §150; we otherwise affirm the judgment. …
“The plaintiff argues that she is entitled to attorney’s fees under the Wage Act. In response, Sapozhnikov argues that an award of attorney’s fees to the plaintiff would not be ‘reasonable’ within the...
Amid the ongoing conflict involving Israel, the United States and Iran, several rumours about Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu have begun circulating widely on social media. Multiple viral posts have...