7th Circuit: Law firm doesn't owe fired PI attorney bonuses, due to terms of compensation pact
After more than five years of litigation, a personal injury lawyer has lost his fight to collect on bonuses he claimed his former law firm employer owed him on breast-implant cases for which payment was received after he was fired.
The motive for his 2007 termination was to avoid paying him the bonuses, Lawrence Hess contended in the litigation he pursued against Kanoski Bresney. However, the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled (PDF) Monday that contractual language was dispositive.
Affirming a federal trial court’s grant of summary judgment to the law firm, a three-judge appellate panel said the words “generated” and “received” should be understood as synonyms in the context of the parties’ agreement. That meant that Hess, once he lost his job, was out of luck as far as collecting any further bonuses was concerned.
“Although we might have used different language, we nevertheless find that the parties intended a simple, straightforward plan for bonus compensation,” the appeals court said in its written opinion.
“That plan does not require K&A to pay Hess fees for cases that settled after his date of termination—even if he worked on those cases before his termination,” the court adds. “Because we hold that the employment agreement does not require such a payment, Hess cannot prove breach.”
Illinois law was applied in the diversity case.
Hat tip: Reuters.
