Yesterday, I discussed the Connecticut Supreme Court’s decision in Ziotas v. The Reardon Law Firm, in which the court held that a bonus does not constitute "wages" when the bonus is discretionary and is not ascertainable by applying a formula. 
I’ve also discussed the background of the case in a prior post which I won’t
In a decision that will be officially released next week, the Connecticut Supreme Court has ruled that a year-end bonus — the amount of which is discretionary — does not constitute "wages" under Connecticut wage & hour laws.
The decision, Ziotas v. The Reardon Law Firm (download here), reverses an appellate court decision to
Remember a Connecticut appellate decision a few weeks ago that suggested that a bonus allegedly promised to an associate could be "wages" under Connecticut’s wage statutes? Indeed, a fellow Connecticut blogger suggested that 2008 was shaping to be a banner y
ear for employees.
Well, not so fast. A new Connecticut Supreme Court decision today
Yesterday, I discussed the employment contract portion of a new Appellate Court case, Ziotas v. The Reardon Law Firm (download here).
Today, I’ll discuss the second part of the court’s decision on whether the associate’s bonus could be said to be "wages". Why is this important? Because under state law (Conn. Gen. Stat. 31-72)
In a decision released today, the Connecticut Appellate Court upheld a lower court judgment that found that a local lawfirm breached its employment contract to an associate by failing to pay that associate a bonus.
It’s rare to see lawfirms involved in employment disputes, and even rarer, to have cases proceed all the way to