Margot Shay was employed by Richard and Joyce Cesler as installation manager at The Power House Car Audio from December 1994 to May 1995. The record shows that Shay was to be paid $10 per hour and receive a 10% interest in the business in return for her employment. Eventually it became apparent that the parties could not work together, and the business arrangement ended. Shay filed suit against the Ceslers. The first count of Shay's complaint, claiming that the Ceslers as individuals owed her $11,125 in back wages, demanded treble wages of $33,375 under sections of the Idaho Code. The second count demanded Shay's 10% interest in the partnership. The Ceslers counterclaimed alleging conversion, breach of contract, and misrepresentation; they also sought dissolution of the partnership.
Outcome:
In a special verdict, the jury found that the Ceslers did not individually contract to pay wages to Shay, that Shay did not convert any of the Ceslers' property, and that no accord and satisfaction had been reached between the parties. The district court entered judgment based on the jury's verdict. Following additional discovery on the value of the business, Shay moved to dismiss the remaining claims and the district court granted the motion. The Ceslers filed a motion for costs and attorney fees as the prevailing party. The district court disallowed fees for Shay's second count demanding her interest in the partnership. It did not award attorney fees for the wage claim because Shay had pleaded an amount exceeding the subsection's statutory maximum of $25,000. However, the district court awarded the Ceslers $13,500 in attorney fees, ruling that Shay's wage claim was based upon a contract for services as well as a commercial transaction
Plaintiff's Experts:
Unknown
Defendant's Experts:
Unknown
Comments:
Shay appealed. The Supreme Court of Idaho, Boise, January 1999 Term, reversed the fee award to Ceslers. See: 977 P.2d 199 (Idaho 1999). The date shown above is the date of the appellate court decision and not the trial date. Reported by JAB.
Related Cases from District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada County
What was the outcome of Margot Shay v. Richard Cesler and Joyce Cesler, husband a...?
The outcome was: In a special verdict, the jury found that the Ceslers did not individually contract to pay wages to Shay, that Shay did not convert any of the Ceslers' property, and that no accord and satisfaction had been reached between the parties. The district court entered judgment based on the jury's verdict. Following additional discovery on the value of the business, Shay moved to dismiss the remaining claims and the district court granted the motion. The Ceslers filed a motion for costs and attorney fees as the prevailing party. The district court disallowed fees for Shay's second count demanding her interest in the partnership. It did not award attorney fees for the wage claim because Shay had pleaded an amount exceeding the subsection's statutory maximum of $25,000. However, the district court awarded the Ceslers $13,500 in attorney fees, ruling that Shay's wage claim was based upon a contract for services as well as a commercial transaction
Which court heard Margot Shay v. Richard Cesler and Joyce Cesler, husband a...?
This case was heard in District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada County, ID. The presiding judge was Daniel T. Eismann.
Who were the attorneys in Margot Shay v. Richard Cesler and Joyce Cesler, husband a...?
Plaintiff's attorney: Park, Thomas & Burkett, Boise, Idaho.. Defendant's attorney: Brown & Edwards, Boise, Idaho..
When was Margot Shay v. Richard Cesler and Joyce Cesler, husband a... decided?