Christopher Evans v. Tiger Claw, Inc. et al. (2011)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

The defendant, Tiger Claw, Inc. (Tiger Claw) manufactures hidden deck fastners for the construction industry and the two individual defendants are its corporate officers.   The plaintiff Christopher Evans was employed by Tiger Claw both as a commission sales person selling tiger claws products and as a regular employee earning an hourly wage.   Under an agreement to purchase shares of stock in Tiger Claw, the plaintiff's earnings from his commission were withheld (stock fund), but no amount of the purchase price per share was established.   As of the date of trial, $10,027.26 was the total amount accumulated in the stock fund.

The plaintiff terminated his employment with Tiger Claw. He made a claim for back wages in the appropriate amount of $192,000.   The claim was filed originally with the State of Connecticut Labor Department by the plaintiffs' prior counsel.   Limiting the claim for a period from October 2004, because of the statute of limitations (General Statutes § 52–596 1), the Labor Department determined the plaintiff was entitled to $3,603.67 unpaid wages.

The plaintiff commenced this action in August 2007, seeking stock in Tiger Claw he claimed that he was promised.   However during the trial, the claim for stock in Tiger Claw was abandoned and there now remains a claim for compensation for the time he spent working for Tiger Claw and the stock fund in the amount of $10,027.26

The court finds that the plaintiff's wage claim is limited to the sum of $3,603.67, the amount found by the Department of Labor.  “[A] valid and final adjudicative determination by an administrative tribunal has the same effects under the rules of res judicata, subject to the same exceptions and qualifications, as a judgment of a court.”  (Citations omitted;  internal quotation marks omitted.)  Lafayette v. General Dynamics Corp., 255 Conn. 762, 772–73, 1 (2001).  “[T]he doctrine of res judicata, [provided that] a former judgment on a claim, if rendered on the merits, is an absolute bar to a subsequent action [between the same parties] on the same claim.   A judgment is final not only as to every matter which was offered to sustain the claim, but also as to any other admissible matter which might have been offered for that purpose.”  (Citations and quotations omitted.)  Myers v. Commissioner of Corrections, 111 Conn.App. 405, 409, (2008).

The court, however finds, that although Tiger Claw is responsible for those wages, the individual defendants are also liable.  Butler v. Hartford Technical Institute, Inc., 243 Conn. 454, 462 (1997).

The court enters judgment in favor of the plaintiff against all the defendants in the amount. of $13,630.93 plus taxable costs.

Berdon, J., J.T.R.

FOOTNOTES

FN1. No action for the payment of remuneration for employment payable periodically shall be brought but within two years after the right of action occurs, except that for limitation shall be tolled upon the filing with the Labor Commissioner of a complaint for failure to pay wages pursuant to the provisions of chapter 558.”  General Statutes, § 52–596..  FN1. No action for the payment of remuneration for employment payable periodically shall be brought but within two years after the right of action occurs, except that for limitation shall be tolled upon the filing with the Labor Commissioner of a complaint for failure to pay wages pursuant to the provisions of chapter 558.”  General Statutes, § 52–596.

Berdon, Robert I., J.T.R.