Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back

Do Employees Recover Attorney's Fees When A Massachusetts Wage Act Case Resolves Through A Settlement?

Written by: Adam M. Hamel

Published in the NEHRA Newsletter (3/21/2019)

The Massachusetts Wage Act provides that an employee who “prevails” in an action to recover unpaid wages “shall … be awarded the costs of the litigation and reasonable attorneys’ fees.”  This “fee-shifting” provision is an exception to well-established “American Rule” under which each party bears his or her own attorney’s fees, win or lose.  In cases where the employee wins at trial, the application of the Wage Act’s fee-shifting provision is clear: the employee will recover his or her attorney’s fees.  But what happens when the case doesn’t go to trial, and instead, the parties resolve the matter through a negotiated settlement in which both sides compromise?  Has the employee “prevailed” in that situation?  Is he or she entitled to recover attorney’s fees?

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court recently answered this question in a case called Ferman v. Sturgis Cleaners, Inc.  The SJC explained that there are only two well-defined approaches for determining whether a party has “prevailed” in a settlement.  The first is called the “catalyst” test, which asks whether the plaintiff’s lawsuit was “a catalyst for [the] defendant’s voluntary change in conduct.”  The second approach is called the “Buckhannon” test (named after a 2001 U.S. Supreme Court case), which requires an additional step of a judge approving the parties’ agreed-upon material change in their legal relationship.  The SJC noted that it had already ruled, in an earlier case, that the Buckhannon test does not apply to Massachusetts fee-shifting statutes, but it had never explicitly adopted the catalyst test.  In Ferman, the SJC took this “logical next step,” and held that “a plaintiff prevails for purposes of an award of attorney’s fees under the Wage Act when his or her suit … [is] a necessary and important factor in causing the defendant to provide a material portion of the relief demanded in the plaintiff’s complaint.”

In explaining its holding, the SJC noted the twin purposes of fee-shifting statutes: first, they serve as a disincentive against unlawful conduct; second, they promote access to the courts for claimants who cannot afford to pay for counsel, and whose cases might otherwise appear too “small” to be financially profitable to an attorney.  The catalyst test, the Court said, encourages prompt settlement of meritorious cases by preventing employers from escaping liability for attorney’s fees by agreeing to an “eleventh hour” settlement on the eve of trial.  The Court also noted that the catalyst test does not reward frivolous lawsuits.  Such cases might result in a “nuisance settlement,” which would not meet the catalyst test’s requirement that the settlement include a “material portion” of the relief sought, and therefore the plaintiff would not be entitled to recover attorney’s fees.

Since attorney’s fees can constitute a significant portion of the possible recover in a Wage Act case, employers facing such claims should consult with their counsel to determine whether early resolution through settlement makes sense to resolve the matter and minimize exposure for attorney’s fees liability.

Adam Hamel is a Director in the Employment Practice Group of McLane Middleton, Professional Association. Adam can be reached at (781) 904-2710  or [email protected].

 

 

Integrity and trust

At McLane Middleton we establish and maintain long-standing relationships with our clients to help us better achieve their unique goals over time. This approach to building trust requires that our esteemed lawyers and professionals use their broad, in-depth knowledge and work together with integrity to ascertain sound resolutions to legal matters for their clients.

Strength in numbers

McLane Middleton is made up of more than 105 attorneys who represent a broad range of clients throughout the region, delivering customized solutions. As a firm we are recognized as having the highest legal ability rating. The firm is rated Preeminent by Martindale Hubbell and is recognized as one of the nation's leading law firms in Chambers USA. Our attorneys are distinguished leaders in their respective practice areas.

Meet Our People

Commitment and collaboration

McLane Middleton's versatile group of attorneys and paralegals become trusted authorities on each case through collaboration. We work with our clients to learn their individual needs first and foremost and, together, we develop comprehensive solutions to their specific legal matters. This approach helps us exceed our clients' expectations efficiently and effectively, client by client, case by case.

Practice Areas

A history of excellence

McLane Middleton was established in 1919 in New Hampshire, and has five offices across two states. However, deep historical roots don't allow you to become innate. Our firm is organized, technological, and knowledgeable. Our history means we are recognized. But our reputation is built on the highest quality of service and experience in very specific areas of law.

The Firm

Intelligence paired with action

Our team continuously seeks opportunities to enhance their professional development and put key learnings to action. The pursuit of further insight guides us to volunteer service opportunities, speaking engagements, and teaching roles. Our lawyers are sought after thought leaders across their industries, and recipients of leadership awards throughout the region.