Legal Opinion
Electronic Data Systems Corp. v. Attorney General
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided June 11, 2009PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBotsford, J.
In this case we return to the question whether the written vacation pay policy of the plaintiff, Electronic Data Systems Corporation (EDS), violates G. L. c. 149, § 148 (Wage Act or § 148), when applied to an employee who is involuntarily *64terminated. See Electronic Data Sys. Corp. v. Attorney Gen., 440 Mass. 1020 (2003) (EDS I). Giving deference to the Attorney General’s reasonable interpretation of the Wage Act and in agreement with the Superior Court judge and the division of administrative law appeals (DALA), we conclude that the statute requires such an employee to be paid for unused…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Wiedmann v. Bradford Group, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2005
- Boston Police Patrolmen's Ass'n v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2002
- Commonwealth v. LydonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1992
- Smith v. Winter Place LLCMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2006
- Felix A. Marino Co. v. Commissioner of Labor & IndustriesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1998
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Lawless v. Steward Health Care Sys., LLCCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2018
- Melia v. Zenhire, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2012
- Lipsitt v. PlaudMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2013
- Crocker v. Townsend Oil Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2012
- Fernandes v. Attleboro Housing AuthorityMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2014
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.