Barufaldi v. Ocean City, Chamber of Commerce, Inc.
Decision Date | 29 October 2010 |
Docket Number | No. 815, Sept. Term, 2009.,815, Sept. Term, 2009. |
Citation | 7 A.3d 643,196 Md.App. 1 |
Parties | Daniel J. BARUFALDI v. OCEAN CITY, Maryland, CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INC. |
Court | Court of Special Appeals of Maryland |
Philip B. Zipin of Silver Spring, MD (Julie G. Martin-Korb, Rockville, MD, on the brief), for appellant.
William J. Hickey (Robert M. Gittins, on the brief) Rockville, MD, for appellee.
Panel: EYLER, DEBORAH S., WRIGHT, ARRIE W. DAVIS (Retired, Specially Assigned) JJ.
This appeal and cross-appeal arise from an employment contract dispute between the Ocean City Chamber of Commerce ("the Chamber"), the appellee/cross-appellant, and its former executive director, Daniel J. Barufaldi, the appellant/cross-appellee. Barufaldi resigned from the Chamber in January of 2007 and thereafter brought an action in the Circuit Court for Worcester County against the Chamber and members of its Board of Directors ("the Board"). He alleged breach of contract and violations of the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection Law ("WPCL"), Md.Code (2008 Repl.Vol., 2009 Supp.), §§ 3-501 et seq. of the Labor and Employment Article ("LE"), and, as to the individual defendants, negligent misrepresentation. All of Barufaldi's claims related to the Chamber's failure to pay incentive-based compensation under his employment contract ("the Agreement"). The Chamber counterclaimed for breach of contract premised on Barufaldi's alleged failure to perform his duties and his premature termination of the Agreement.
After several of the individual defendants were dismissed, the case was tried to a jury for three days. At the close of Barufaldi's case, the trial court granted judgment in favor of the remaining individual defendants on all counts. At the closeof all the evidence, the trial court granted judgment for Barufaldi on the Chamber's counterclaim. Barufaldi's breach of contract and WPCL claims against the Chamber went to the jury.
The jury found that the Chamber had breached the Agreement and that Barufaldi was owed $60,000 in unpaid wages. It further found that the Chamber had violated the WPCL and that its failure to pay Barufaldi was not the result of a bona fide dispute. The jury declined, however, to awardBarufaldi treble damages under the WPCL.1
The Chamber filed post-trial motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict ("JNOV"), for remittitur or a new trial on damages, and for a new trial. All were denied. Barufaldi filed a post-trial motion for attorneys' fees under the WPCL. His motion was denied in its entirety.
Barufaldi timely appealed from the denial of his motion for attorneys' fees. He presents one question for review, which we have rephrased:
Did the trial court err in denying his motion for attorneys' fees made pursuant to the WPCL?
The Chamber timely cross-appealed from the denial of its post-trial motions, the jury's finding that there was no bona fide dispute as to Barufaldi's entitlement to incentive pay, and the trial court's denial of certain requested jury instructions. It presents five questions for review on cross-appeal, which we have reworded and reordered:
For the reasons to follow, we answer the Chamber's questions in the negative and therefore shall affirm the judgments. We answer Barufaldi's question in the affirmative and therefore shall remand for further proceedings on the motion for attorneys' fees.
The Chamber is an association of businesses in Ocean City. Its purpose is to increase tourism and business opportunities in the community for the benefit of its members. It is composed of a non-profit entity operating a visitor center funded primarily by membership dues and grants and a for-profit entity selling the Ocean City Guide Book ("the Guide"). Sales of the Guide and advertisements in the Guide are the Chamber's major source of revenue.
In the fall of 2005, the Chamber interviewed and hired Barufaldi as its new executive director, at a base salary of $52,000 per year. He began work on November 1, 2005. Immediately prior to accepting theChamber's offer of employment, Barufaldi was working as executive director of the Ken-Tom Chamber of Commerce in upstate New York.
A little over two months after beginning his employment, Barufaldi and the Chamber executed the Agreement. It was backdated to November 1, 2005. In its introductory paragraph, the Agreement defines "Employer" to mean the Board, the executive committee of the Board, and officers of the Chamber. Paragraphs 1 and 2 set forth Barufaldi's job responsibilities by reference to an attached job description and a list of duties. They obligate Barufaldi to perform these duties diligently and in good faith.
Paragraph 3 states that the Agreement is for a three-year term-from November 1, 2005, until October 31, 2008-and provides for automatic renewal absent written notice by either party to the Agreement.
Paragraph 4, titled "COMPENSATION OF EMPLOYEE," reads as follows:
(Emphasis added.) Subparagraphs "c" and "d" further state that any incentive-based compensation ceases immediately if the Agreement is terminated for cause, that Barufaldi may participate in the Chamber IRA plan, and that Barufaldi and his wife would receive health insurance coverage through the Chamber. The language of the Agreement allowed it to be terminated by the Chamber for cause only. There was no such corresponding termination right for Barufaldi.
Barufaldi asserts that he repeatedly asked then-Board president Neil Hitchcock to meet with him to determine the "base line net revenue figure" required under the Agreement, but Hitchcock refused to do so. In September of 2006, Kathy Panco replaced Hitchcock as president of the Board. Barufaldi then attempted to reach an agreement about this figure with her. While Panco initially seemed willing to work with Barufaldi to determine the "base line net revenue figure," no agreement was reached. There is no dispute that a "base line net revenue figure" never was established during Barufaldi's employment by the Chamber.
On October 31, 2006, Barufaldi met with the members of the Board and they presented him with the proposed terms of a new contract. The parties hotly dispute the genesis of this meeting and what occurred there....
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Pinnacle Grp., LLC v. Kelly
... ... Early Healthcare Giver, Inc. , 439 Md. 646, 97 A.3d 621 (2014) and Marshall ... O'Brien & Gere Eng'rs, Inc. v. City of Salisbury , 447 Md. 394, 421, 135 A.3d 473 ... at 657, 97 A.3d 621 (quoting Barufaldi v. Ocean City, Md. Chamber of Commerce, Inc. , ... ...
-
Falls v. 1CI, Inc.
...pay their employees and provides remedies for an employer's failure to pay an employee all wages owed to him. Barufaldi v. Ocean City, 196 Md.App. 1, 27, 7 A.3d 643 (2010). “Wage” is defined in the MWPCL as “all compensation that is due to an employee for employment” and includes bonuses, c......
- Moore v. State
-
Jones v. Aberdeen Proving Ground Fed. Credit Union
... ... Inc. (“Experian”). ECF 1 (the ... 2022); ACA Fin. Guar. Corp. v. City of Buena Vista , ... 917 F.3d 206, 211 (4th ... may be decided as a matter of law.” Barufaldi v ... Ocean City, Chamber of Commerce, ... ...