Employment – Contract – Statute of Frauds

Listen to this article

Where a defendant employer has moved for summary judgment on a plaintiff’s claims for retaliation, breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and unjust enrichment, numerous material disputes of fact preclude entry of summary judgment, so the motion must be denied.

“Vinay Mehra (‘Mehra’), former President of Boston Globe Media Partners, LLC (the ‘Globe’), sued the Globe at the end of June 2023, three years after it terminated his employment on June 30, 2020. After I dismissed Mehra’s Wage Act claim based on an alleged commission for 2020 (Count I), the Globe now moves for summary judgment on Mehra’s remaining claims for retaliation (Count II), breach of contract (Count III), breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing (Count IV), and unjust enrichment (Count V). Because of the existence of material disputes of fact, the Globe’s motion must be denied. …

“Here, numerous material disputes of fact preclude entry of summary judgment. The precise terms of Mehra’s compensation and incentive package are disputed. Whether Mehra asserted his rights to a sizable commission and how that was received is disputed. The reasons for Mehra’s termination, including whether the asserted justification was pretextual, is disputed. And whether the Globe acted in violation of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing is disputed. These disputes of fact are more than sufficient to deny the Globe’s motion.

“Nor does the Statute of Frauds necessarily rescue the Globe from any of Mehra’s remaining claims. ‘The Statute of Frauds ‘applies only to contracts which by their terms cannot be performed within the year. It does not apply to contracts which may be performed within, although they may also extend beyond, that period.’ Boothby v. Texon, Inc., 414 Mass. 468, 479 (1993), quoting Doherty v. Doherty Ins. Agency, Inc., 878 F.2d 546, 551 (1st Cir. 1989). Boothby involved a contract for ‘permanent employment.’ The court found that the contract ‘could have been performed within one year: Boothby could have died or Texon could have discontinued its business, at which point its obligations to employ Boothby would end. In addition, Texon could have terminated Boothby’s employment if he failed to perform satisfactorily.’ Boothby, 414 Mass. at 479. So too, here.

“Moreover, even if the Statute of Frauds did apply, I cannot say, as a matter of law, that the emails signed by David Carillo are inadequate to satisfy the Statute of Frauds or, if they are, that Mehra did not detrimentally and reasonably rely on the Globe’s promises.”

Mehra v. Boston Globe Media Partners, LLC (Lawyers Weekly No. 09-002-25) (3 pages) (Krupp, J.) (Suffolk Superior Court) (Civil No. 23-1483-BLS1) (Jan. 13, 2025).

Click here to read the full text of the opinion.