Mathauser v. Hellyer

• Decision Date: 10 March 1977
• Docket Number: No. 12211,12211
• Citation: 98 Idaho 235,560 P.2d 1325
• Parties: William R. MATHAUSER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. George HELLYER et al., Defendants-Respondents.
• Court: Idaho Supreme Court

Page 1325

560 P.2d 1325

98 Idaho 235

William R. MATHAUSER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. George HELLYER et al., Defendants-Respondents.

No. 12211.

Supreme Court of Idaho.

March 10, 1977.

Bruce J. Collier of Kneeland, Laggis, Korb & Collier, Ketchum, for plaintiff-appellant.

Kevin Francis Trainor of Walker & Kennedy, Twin Falls, for defendants-respondents.

SHEPARD, Justice.

This is an appeal from summary judgment in favor of defendant-respondents Hellyer and Giacobbi on the basis that the statute of limitations barred plaintiff-appellant Mathauser's action. We affirm.

The record most favorably construed toward Mathauser reveals that early 1969 he was engaged by Hellyer and Giacobbi as a design and construction contractor for a fee of ten percent of the total cost of several real estate development projects. In the early summer of 1969, Giacobbi and Mathauser formed a partnership (G & M Contractors) which continued to provide contracting services to Giacobbi and Hellyer. During that time payments were made to Mathauser in installments on the basis of the ten percent commission. Shortly thereafter Hellyer and Giacobbi formed Anstep Corporation which assumed all of those individuals' previous rights and liabilities including the contract with G & M Contractors. On July 30, 1969, Anstep Corporation offered to acquire G & M Contractors, which offer it is argued placed Mathauser in the status of an employee of Anstep Corporation. The acceptance of that offer and the change in status of Mathauser to employee is the crux of the instant action. That relationship, be it employee or independent contractor, continued until terminated in late 1969.

On July 25, 1973, Mathauser filed a complaint claiming that he had received only a fractional part of his compensation under the agreement and that $100,000.00 remained due and outstanding under an independent contractor theory of liability. Upon motion therefor the court granted summary judgment for respondents, holding that I.C. § 45-608 barred Mathauser's claim. I.C. § 45-608 provides:

'Any person shall have the right to collect salary, wages, overtime compensation, penalties and liquidated damages provided by any law or pursuant to a contract of employment, but any action thereon shall be commenced in a court of competent jurisdiction within two (2) years after the cause of action shall have accrued, provided, however, that in the event salary or wages have been paid to any employee and such employee claims additional salary, wages, overtime compensation, penalties or liquidated damages, because of work done or services performed during his employment for the pay period covered by said payment, any action therefor shall be commenced within six (6) months from the accrual of the cause of action * * *. In the event an action is not commenced as herein provided, any remedy on the cause of action shall be forever barred.' (Emphasis added.)

On appeal Mathauser asserts that the entry of summary judgment was error in that the statute purports to include only 'employees' suing for 'wages' and there remains a material question of fact whether Mathauser was an employee or an independent contractor at the times in question.

The July 30, 1969, Anstep proposal to acquire G & M Contractors included provisions that Mathauser would be paid a salary of $14,000 per year, that he would do no outside designing...