In a recent victory, Dressel/Malikschmitt LLP represented former Chief Operating Officer George Polson in a compensation dispute against the chemicals company Vivimed Labs Inc. USA.
The case, Polson v. Vivimed Labs, revolved around Vivimed’s denial of promised compensation to Polson following the partial sale of the Global Specialty Chemicals Division, which he headed for four years. Our client’s claim for breach of contract was based on the company’s failure to pay the plaintiff annual bonuses, incremental salary increases, additional stock grants or cash in lieu of a 401(k) plan, and special compensation following the sale of a portion of his division.
Defendants argued the Employment Agreement did not “guarantee” an annual bonus payment to the plaintiff and contended that the employment agreement established that entitlement to annual bonuses was contingent on the plaintiff meeting certain performance-based targets.
New Jersey Federal Judge Zahid N. Quraishi ruled in our client’s favor on May 26, affirming that Vivimed was indeed liable to pay out $460,000 tied to bonuses and retirement payments.
Judge Quraishi underlined that Polson’s four-year employment contract entitled him to $100,000 in annual guaranteed bonuses and an additional $15,000 per year as compensation intended to replace a 401(k) plan.
Crucially, the judge reaffirmed that the agreed-upon compensation was not contingent on performance goals nor any extraordinary compensation connected to the corporate acquisition.
This ruling underscores the paramount importance of unambiguous employment contracts and ratifies the rights of employees to secure their promised compensation.
If you are involved in an employment dispute, our experienced team of attorneys is ready to hear your story, and advise you of your options. Fill out our contact form or call us at (848) 202-9323.
The content in this article is for general informational purposes only. It should not be construed as legal advice or a substitute for legal advice. The information above does not create an attorney-client relationship, nor do prior results guarantee future outcomes. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.