New York Employment Contracts Legal Questions

I have serious doubts that the $5,000 training fee repayment would be enforceable, although it is possible that it would be if your employer actually incurred that expense for your training.  I see no reason why the restriction on performing services within 25 miles would not be enforceable - it almost certainly would not be enforceable if it provided that you couldnt' compete within 25 miles AFTER your employment was terminated, but your employer is certainly allowed to bar you from moonlighting while employed.  Moreover, as an at will employee, your employer can fire you for almost any reason; you could be fired for moonlighting even if the provision was not in the contract.  From the little you've written, being fired, and possibly being ineligible to collect unemployment, seems like the only consequence of breaching the 25 mile provision, but it is possible, depending on exactly what the contract provides, that you could be liable for damages for such a breach.  I also see no problem with a commission-based compensation scheme (assuming no problem with minimum wage laws, on which I have no expertise and am not offering any opinion.)  As for whether this is a fair contract, only you can decide that for yourself.... Read Answer

In New York, the statute of limitations for legal malpractice is 3 years from the date of the malpractice, but the period is tolled while the lawyer continues to represent you.  Thus, if your attorney blows a statute of limitations, you would have 3 years from that date to sue him/her.  However, if the attorney continues to represent you after that, trying to appeal the ruling that the limitations period had run, the 3 years would run from the date the attorney ceased to represent you in that matter.... Read Answer

I'm not sure if I understand your question. If you're asking whether an employment contract which provides that the employee will get 15 days of vacation, including 7 national holidays, would be enforceable I see  no reason why not.  However, that doesn't mean that you have to agree to it. If you're asking whether a contract providing that an employee will get 15 days of vacation, saying nothing about national holidays, will be construed to mean 15 days of vacation including national holidays, that would depend on the individual facts of each case.  For example, if the employee had been working at the same place for 10 years and that had always been the vacation policy, I'd say yes.  In general, however, I think it likely that a Court would take a contract like that to mean 15 days of vacation not including national holidays.... Read Answer

Was the employer the individual, or was "the company" a separate legal entity.  If "the company", your employer, was a separate legal entity like a corporation or llc, it survives its owner's death, and you can collect on your judgment by levying on its assets, restraining its bank accounts, and garnishing its income.  If the individual was your employer, i.e. "the company" was just a sole proprietorship, you will probably have to file a claim against his estate in the Surrogate's Court.  If no estate proceeding has been commenced, you may have to start one.  However, you may have waited too long, and all of the decedent's assets may already have been distributed.  I'm not sure of the time constraints.... Read Answer

In New York, when a person is harassed to the point where they reasonably decide that they have to quit, it is known as a "constructive discharge", and is treated as if the employer had terminated the employee without good cause.  HOWEVER, if you were, as most employees are, employed at will, your employer could terminate you at any time and for any reason (other than statutorily prohibited reasons, such as race, gender, religion, in retaliation for certain types of whistleblowing, etc.)  The employer is allowed to fire you without good cause.  Thus, if you were an employee at will, and the decision to get you to quit wasn't motivated by your race, gender, nationality, etc., you have no claim for constructive discharge.... Read Answer

I agree with your reading of the contract, althoug I find the "endeavor to cause" language troubling.  By mentioning the opportunity to another employee and allowing him to come along to the same interview, for which no arrangements had previously been made, have you and your first colleague "endeavored to cause" the third colleague to leave his employment?  It's a close call.  Also, I'm frankly shocked that it contains only an anti-raiding provision and you're not worried about any covenants against competition or solicitation of customers.  Moreover, even if you haven't, in fact, violated the agreement, the objective circumstances (one person has a friend working for a competitor, he and two others go to interview at the same time, all are hired by the competitor at the same time and resign their current employment together) could lead someone (your former employer, a judge, a jury) to believe that the circumstances are not as innocent as you contend.  If I was on a jury, it would be tough for you to convince me that the guy with the friend working for a competitor had not solicited the other two to come work for the competitor. One final note.  Even if a Court believes that you have violated the agreement, that doesn't necessarily mean that the agreement is enforceable.  Agreements which restrict people's ability to earn a living, which this one does by restricting employees ability to learn of and pursue new job opportunities, are carefully scrutinized by Courts, and are not always enforced.... Read Answer

You may have a valid claim against your former employer, but you may also have limitations problems, and there could be other defenses.  For example, did you have a written employment contract?  If so, it may explicitly say that where it conflicts with the handbook, it controls. You should also be aware that, to the extent that any other party (medicare, medicaid, private insurance) has paid any monies due to your disability, that party may be subrogated to your claims against your former employer, meaning that that party may have a lien against any recovery to the extent that it has paid out, and may be entitled to be repaid "off the top." ... Read Answer

Anybody can request anything they want (leaving aside prostitution, narcotics, etc.), but whether you are obligated to comply without being further compensated depends on what your contract provides.  If the contract is silent, the work you did while under contract probably belongs to the company; anything you did after you were terminated probably belongs to you.  If you completed artwork after you were terminated, I would say that only the work you had done prior to termination must be returned.   Whether you want to provide anything further is up to you.  You may be within your legal rights to refuse, but you may want to do so to avoid creating ill will and burning your bridges.... Read Answer

The question you're asking has nothing to do with legal advice, and depends entirely on the strength of your particular likes and dislikes.  How important is it to you that you get a full job description before taking the job (fyi, if your job offer is not for a definite term and/or doesn't limit the reasons you can be fired, it is possible that the employer could ask you to do something outside of the description at any time and fire you if you refuse)?  How resistant do you think this potential employer will be to give you a full description?  How likely is it that the employer will pull the offer if you push the issue?  How bad do you need the job?  Do you car if your new employer views you as a trouble maker or a  high maintenance employee?  Only you can weigh these factors and decide whether the issue is important enough to you to outweigh the risks.... Read Answer

Did you former employer make any factual statement (not opinion) about you which was not true, and which caused you damage?  From what you write above, you lost your job because your former employer told your new employer that you had taken and were using proprietary information belonging to your former employer.  While it may be arguable whether the information was actually a trade secret, the statement does not appear to be factually untrue,and therefore is not actionable.  However, if your former employer makes untrue and defamatory statements about you which cause you to suffer damages, for example, if it tells prospective employers that you were fired due to a cocaine problem and this lie prevents you from getting a job, you could have a valid claim for defamation (libel is written defamation, slander is oral defamation) as well as tortious interference with prospective business relations. ... Read Answer

It's not clear to me whether you want to work for the party opposing your former firm's client, or for the law firm representing that party.  Either way you can work for them, but you can't divulge any privileged or confidential information you learned during your employ with the first law firm.  Even assuming that you have never agreed to maintain the confidentiality of the matters you worked on for the law firm Iit doesn't have to be in writing), and that, as an assitant, you are not subject to any ethical statute or rule, the confidential and privileged information to which you refer might well be considered trade secrets, which a former employee in any business may not use.  Although I am not aware, off the top of my head, of any case on point, I believe that any Court is likely to hold that allowing you to disclose attorney/client privileged information to your new employer would violate public policy, and would prevent you from doing so and/or prevent the recipient from using the information  If your new employer tried to use that information to their advantage in the lawsuit, the Court would prevent them and possibly sanction them.  If your new employer was a law firm, they might be subject to disciplinary action as well.  If you do go to another law firm, they would be wise not to allow you to work on that matter.... Read Answer

Non-competition agreements are not always enforced.  It is possible that the non-compete agreement you signed, to the extent that it barred you from working in a field in which you never worked while employed by  your former employer will not be enforced, but the first step to any analysis is what does the agreement say?  What is it that it bars you from doing?  Does it specifically define the business you can't compete with?  Does that definition include successors in interest?... Read Answer

The new owner has the right to evict you; however, that would require an eviction proceeding be brought in court. There is no viable claim for stress. If the prior owner owed you wages, you would have to bring suit against him. Gerry Wendrovsky, Esq.,- Upper West Side Landord-Tenant Lawyer www.upperwestsidelawyer.com... Read Answer