I am being Sued for Unpaid Wages Claim

[BluffMaster]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

Hello Fellas,
I am in some untidy situation, I worked with my brother in operations department. He & his company has been sued for some unpaid wages, as far as claim goes plaintiff has been paid every single penny. But my question is Plaintiff's attorney has put My Brother, His Company, His Wife (since he files joint taxes) & ME.. Can they do that? I am not into ownership and does not own any part of his company. Its sole proprietorship.

More of my concern is if there is a judgement against company will it come to my name too? Since they have me as defendant.

What are my options to get my name out of that lawsuit.

Also if judgement comes against me what can I do afterwards? I planned to start my own business and in licensing process. If Judgement comes against us would it effect my credit?

Please advise.

 

[Nellibelle]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

Hello Fellas,
I am in some untidy situation, I worked with my brother in operations department. He & his company has been sued for some unpaid wages, as far as claim goes plaintiff has been paid every single penny. But my question is Plaintiff's attorney has put My Brother, His Company, His Wife (since he files joint taxes) & ME.. Can they do that? I am not into ownership and does not own any part of his company. Its sole proprietorship.

More of my concern is if there is a judgement against company will it come to my name too? Since they have me as defendant.

What are my options to get my name out of that lawsuit.

Also if judgement comes against me what can I do afterwards? I planned to start my own business and in licensing process. If Judgement comes against us would it effect my credit?

Please advise.

Your Brother could probably include the fact that you are not an owner of the company in his Answer to the Complaint. That way, if the Complaint is not amended, dropping you as a Defendant, the Plaintiff/Attorney could be sanctioned for continuing to include you as a Defendant when it is so obvious that you aren't.

Also, there is NO WAY you will get a judgement against you, unless it can be proven by preponderance of the evidence that you are indeed liable for any unpaid wages or any other damages pled in the Complaint. I can see of no reason why or how you can have a judgement against you if you are not the owner of the company.

 

[Ladyback1]

Your Brother could probably include the fact that you are not an owner of the company in his Answer to the Complaint. That way, if the Complaint is not amended, dropping you as a Defendant, the Plaintiff/Attorney could be sanctioned for continuing to include you as a Defendant when it is so obvious that you aren't.

Also, there is NO WAY you will get a judgement against you, unless it can be proven by preponderance of the evidence that you are indeed liable for any unpaid wages or any other damages pled in the Complaint. I can see of no reason why or how you can have a judgement against you if you are not the owner of the company.

Really? Do tell is your crystal ball that accurate?

You don't have enough information from the OP to make such assertions and claims!

Feel free to ask the OP questions so that you can get the necessary information.

(FWIW--yes, the OP could be included in a lawsuit, could have a judgment against him personally...)

 

[quincy]

Your Brother could probably include the fact that you are not an owner of the company in his Answer to the Complaint. That way, if the Complaint is not amended, dropping you as a Defendant, the Plaintiff/Attorney could be sanctioned for continuing to include you as a Defendant when it is so obvious that you aren't.

Also, there is NO WAY you will get a judgement against you, unless it can be proven by preponderance of the evidence that you are indeed liable for any unpaid wages or any other damages pled in the Complaint. I can see of no reason why or how you can have a judgement against you if you are not the owner of the company.

Please provide legal support for the information you have posted, Nellibelle.

 

[Nellibelle]

Really? Do tell is your crystal ball that accurate?

You don't have enough information from the OP to make such assertions and claims!

Feel free to ask the OP questions so that you can get the necessary information.

(FWIW--yes, the OP could be included in a lawsuit, could have a judgment against him personally...)

My accurate response was based on the fact the OP said he was being sued for unpaid wages when he does not pay the wages--his Brother (employer) pays the wages. That is all the information I need to respond as I did!! Why would I need the crystal ball to determine that?

Also, I said there was no way the OP could get a judgement against him, 'UNLESS'--meaning that certain things would have to actually SHOW THAT the OP was/is liable--which isn't indicated in his post!

To recap: The OP said he's getting sued for unpaid wages, yet, since he is NOT the employer (owner of the company), he IS NOT responsible for paying wages (anymore than you or I)! Therefore, unless the OP isn't telling us the whole story, he should be dropped as a Defendant in this lawsuit.

 

[Ladyback1]

My accurate response was based on the fact the OP said he was being sued for unpaid wages when he does not pay the wages--his Brother (employer) pays the wages. That is all the information I need to respond as I did!! Why would I need the crystal ball to determine that?

Also, I said there was no way the OP could get a judgement against him, 'UNLESS'--meaning that certain things would have to actually SHOW THAT the OP was/is liable--which isn't indicated in his post!

To recap: The OP said he's getting sued for unpaid wages, yet, since he is NOT the employer (owner of the company), he IS NOT responsible for paying wages (anymore than you or I)! Therefore, unless the OP isn't telling us the whole story, he should be dropped as a Defendant in this lawsuit.

please provide legal precedence, case law and/or code/statute that supports your position.

 

[quincy]

My accurate response was based on the fact the OP said he was being sued for unpaid wages when he does not pay the wages--his Brother (employer) pays the wages. That is all the information I need to respond as I did!! Why would I need the crystal ball to determine that?

Also, I said there was no way the OP could get a judgement against him, 'UNLESS'--meaning that certain things would have to actually SHOW THAT the OP was/is liable--which isn't indicated in his post!

To recap: The OP said he's getting sued for unpaid wages, yet, since he is NOT the employer (owner of the company), he IS NOT responsible for paying wages (anymore than you or I)! Therefore, unless the OP isn't telling us the whole story, he should be dropped as a Defendant in this lawsuit.

Please provide legal support for your answer, Nellibelle.

Why is it, for example, that BluffMaster does not have to file his own answer? Isn't he a named defendant?

 

[Nellibelle]

Please provide legal support for your answer, Nellibelle.

Why is it, for example, that BluffMaster does not have to file his own answer? Isn't he a named defendant?

I suppose he could file his own Answer, but his Brother/ Brother's Attorney could just as well file an Answer pointing out the fact the OP should be a non-party to the suit.

My response was supported by common sense. For instance, can't you (and Ladyback) understand that if the OP isn't an owner of the company, he is not responsible for unpaid wages? The OP says he is being sued (along with his brother) for unpaid wages, yet he is not the owner of the company. YOU are not the owner of the company either, so if your name was on the Complaint as a Defendant, would you believe me if I said you are not liable?

That is all I'm saying is that the OP is NOT LIABLE if he is not responsible for paying employee wages (which according to his post. he isn't).

 

[quincy]

I suppose he could file his own Answer, but his Brother/ Brother's Attorney could just as well file an Answer pointing out the fact the OP should be a non-party to the suit.

My response was supported by common sense. For instance, can't you (and Ladyback) understand that if the OP isn't an owner of the company, he is not responsible for unpaid wages? The OP says he is being sued (along with his brother) for unpaid wages, yet he is not the owner of the company. YOU are not the owner of the company either, so if your name was on the Complaint as a Defendant, would you believe me if I said you are not liable?

That is all I'm saying is that the OP is NOT LIABLE if he is not responsible for paying employee wages (which according to his post. he isn't).

Responses supported by "common sense" alone do not cut it on a legal forum, Nellibelle.

Please provide LEGAL SUPPORT (laws or case law) to show that what you say is what the law says (as a hint: it doesn't say what you think it says). And please tell us why what you suggest BluffMaster do won't be harmful to BluffMaster (as a hint: it can be).

Your posts in this thread should be ignored by BluffMaster.

 

[Ladyback1]

I suppose he could file his own Answer, but his Brother/ Brother's Attorney could just as well file an Answer pointing out the fact the OP should be a non-party to the suit.

My response was supported by common sense. For instance, can't you (and Ladyback) understand that if the OP isn't an owner of the company, he is not responsible for unpaid wages? The OP says he is being sued (along with his brother) for unpaid wages, yet he is not the owner of the company. YOU are not the owner of the company either, so if your name was on the Complaint as a Defendant, would you believe me if I said you are not liable?

That is all I'm saying is that the OP is NOT LIABLE if he is not responsible for paying employee wages (which according to his post. he isn't).

OH for the love of all that is holy! Owners are not the only one responsible for wages.... there are so many things that could make the OP a responsible party.
Do you get that?
So saying that the OP is NOT responsible, and would not have a judgment against the OP personally is inaccurate at best.

In order to provide accurate information, sometimes there are questions that need to be asked and answered.

For Example: What was the OP's position w/ the company?

 

[Nellibelle]

OH for the love of all that is holy! Owners are not the only one responsible for wages.... there are so many things that could make the OP a responsible party.
Do you get that?
So saying that the OP is NOT responsible, and would not have a judgment against the OP personally is inaccurate at best.

In order to provide accurate information, sometimes there are questions that need to be asked and answered.

For Example: What was the OP's position w/ the company?

Of course there may be information the OP is not telling us that could show him to be liable in some fashion, but there are few circumstances that would enable him to be liable (as an individual defendant) for acting as an agent of the Company. Such circumstances may be the committment of Fraud or some other illegal act committed by the OP in conjunction with the unpaid wages.

It could be that the OP was just an employee like the Plaintiff was and therefore, not liable for unpaid wages. If the OP were acting as an agent of the company and did nothing illegal in regard to unpaid wages, it is the
company itself that should be the Defendant and not the OP as an individual Defendant.

It would be interesting to see exactly what the pleadings say as to why the OP is named as a Defendant. Such pleadings according to Ca. Civil Procedure Section 128.7 ET SEQ, should have 'evidentiary support' or likely to have 'evidentiary support' showing why the OP should be a Defendant or the Plaintiff/Attorney would be open to sanctions. Perhaps Bluffmaster could respond, pointing out allegations made that attempt to make him a Defendant in this matter.

 

[Ladyback1]

Of course there may be information the OP is not telling us that could show him to be liable in some fashion, but there are few circumstances that would enable him to be liable (as an individual defendant) for acting as an agent of the Company. Such circumstances may be the committment of Fraud or some other illegal act committed by the OP in conjunction with the unpaid wages.

It could be that the OP was just an employee like the Plaintiff was and therefore, not liable for unpaid wages. If the OP were acting as an agent of the company and did nothing illegal in regard to unpaid wages, it is the
company itself that should be the Defendant and not the OP as an individual Defendant.

It would be interesting to see exactly what the pleadings say as to why the OP is named as a Defendant. Such pleadings according to Ca. Civil Procedure Section 128.7 ET SEQ, should have 'evidentiary support' or likely to have 'evidentiary support' showing why the OP should be a Defendant or the Plaintiff/Attorney would be open to sanctions. Perhaps Bluffmaster could respond, pointing out allegations made that attempt to make him a Defendant in this matter.

*Sigh*
Of course Nelli who knows all.

Don't you get it? You stated absolutes in your initial post. You have no way of knowing absolutes in this case. Before you made such definitive statements of your opinion, getting more information would have been a good idea.

And I would not depend on my employer to defend me or my actions if I was named a defendant personally! That would be a fool's errand.

 

[Nellibelle]

Responses supported by "common sense" alone do not cut it on a legal forum, Nellibelle.

Please provide LEGAL SUPPORT (laws or case law) to show that what you say is what the law says (as a hint: it doesn't say what you think it says). And please tell us why what you suggest BluffMaster do won't be harmful to BluffMaster (as a hint: it can be).

Your posts in this thread should be ignored by BluffMaster.

How can my advice to Bluffmaster that he or his Brother respond with reasons why he ISN'T a Defendant be harmful to him?

I'm well aware of what can be or cannot be done with regard to naming a person as a Defendant in a lawsuit. I know that if the OP is being sued for unpaid wages, the Plaintiff better have factual contentions that have or are likely to have 'evidentiary support' pursuant to CCP section 128.7 that show the OP's status as a Defendant is warranted or they could be liable for sanctions.

My posts in this thread should not be ignored by Bluffmaster because they explain the right he has to seek sanctions (as well as being dismissed as a Defendant) if his issues with the Plaintiff involve non-compliance with the CCP section I referred to.

 

[quincy]

How can my advice to Bluffmaster that he or his Brother respond with reasons why he ISN'T a Defendant be harmful to him?

I'm well aware of what can be or cannot be done with regard to naming a person as a Defendant in a lawsuit. I know that if the OP is being sued for unpaid wages, the Plaintiff better have factual contentions that have or are likely to have 'evidentiary support' pursuant to CCP section 128.7 that show the OP's status as a Defendant is warranted or they could be liable for sanctions.

My posts in this thread should not be ignored by Bluffmaster because they explain the right he has to seek sanctions (as well as being dismissed as a Defendant) if his issues with the Plaintiff involve non-compliance with the CCP section I referred to.

BluffMaster, you should seek out the help of your OWN attorney. You are named as a defendant in the lawsuit and your defenses to the suit will be different than those of your brother, his wife and the company as a whole.

The attorney you hire can review the reasons behind the naming of you as a defendant, and any facts of your involvement with the claims being made by the plaintiff, and can advise you accordingly.

And to Nellibelle: The function of this forum is not to educate YOU on the law. If you want to contribute to the forum as an advisor, please learn the law before you post. The members of this forum should not have to spend their time correcting all of the misinformation you post.

And one last word of advice to BluffMaster: Nellibelle does not know the law, despite whatever claims he might make to the contrary, so please ignore all that he writes.

 

[cbg]

You've spent enough time here to know, Nellie, that no poster can permanently delete anyone else's post. If the moderator sees no problem with the post, it will be restored. If it is not restored, that's because ADMIN found the post objectionable, inaccurate, or both.