1 July 2013
This is a common question and one that has the typical
legal answer, it depends. The author
herein recommends a comprehensive approach to this type of question.
Initially, let’s point out that we must back up and ask
whether there is a claim to being with.
Typically a person answers this question, without much, if any,
professional help. At best, they have
called and talked to an attorney, usually over the phone, and obtained what they
believed was the correct answer, which is almost always, yes. They did not have the attorney review any
documents related to the issue and presented a one-sided story of the
facts. Further, human nature being what
it is, an attorney, especially one that has just “met” the client, may be
reluctant to tell the caller there is no claim.
Although with a very simple set of facts a proper assessment can be made
in one phone call, often this approach is risky as many times there is not
enough investigation into the facts or law that could apply.
Assuming there is a claim, the next question that needs
to be answered is: What kind of claim is it?
And the last question: what statute of limitations applies?
There are broad categories that most lawyers can recite
readily, such as tort (generally 3 years in Massachusetts), unfair business
practices (generally 4 years in Massachusetts), and contract (generally 6 years
in Massachusetts). However, these broad
categories, are just that — broad — and an attorney less familiar with the
facts or possible claims can easily mistakenly place a claim into one of these
broad categories and miss a more specific and applicable limitation. Not only that, it may not be abundantly clear
in the law.
For example, in Crocker
v. Townsend Oil Company the plaintiffs brought a case arguing that they
were employees and not independent contractors and thus were entitled to
compensation for overtime pay. Crocker
v. Townsend Oil Company, Inc., 464 Mass. 1 (2012). One question was whether the general 3 year limitation
in the Wage Act or a 2 year limitation period a different statute governing
overtime claims applied to the specific overtime claims brought by the
plaintiffs. Crocker v. Townsend Oil
Company, Inc., 464 Mass. at 6. This
caused the court to have to compare the statutes. It decided that a plaintiff could bring a
claim for hours worked within the 3 years, but if successful, the recovery
would be limited to the regular hourly rate and not the enhanced overtime rate. Crocker v. Townsend Oil Company, Inc.,
464 Mass. at 7.
As you can imagine, the set of facts that existed in Crocker, even though not all that
complicated, would not be adequately addressed with a simply phone call. Even if both statutes were considered, it
would take formulating a formal legal opinion to allow a plaintiff to assess
the claim properly.
The author suggests that if you find yourself assessing a
claim, instead of relying on free advice obtained over the phone, to formally
engage and compensate an attorney to answer the proper questions; and further,
make the decision whether to pursue the claim without delay.
No comments:
Post a Comment