Foley Hoag LLP has secured a major victory for its client Loomis, Sayles & Company in the case Weiss v. Loomis, Sayles & Company, Inc. before the Massachusetts Appeals Court.
This appeal centered on the Massachusetts independent contractor statute, and specifically, whether a worker of one business can sue another business when that worker provides his services through a business-to-business arrangement. Here, the plaintiff, Joel Weiss, was a career software engineer who had started his own business decades ago providing technology services to big-name companies. In 2010, Loomis Sayles contracted with one of the largest technology consulting firms, Eliassen Group, for software engineering services. Eliassen engaged Weiss' business, JoSol, Inc., to do this work. A few years later, Weiss sued Loomis Sayles, claiming he was misclassified as an independent contractor and entitled to a cash payment to cover his purported lost employee benefits.
Loomis Sayles argued that Weiss had no basis to sue under the independent contractor statute because he was not an individual providing services to Loomis. Specifically, in order to even get to the question of misclassification, a plaintiff needs standing to bring such a claim. There is no standing, in a case like this, where a plaintiff provides his business' (JoSol) services to another business (Eliassen) and then that business provides those services to the end-user (Loomis). In other words, a company like Loomis Sayles ought to be able to buy the professional services of another business without worrying that it will later be accused of misclassification.
After a decade-plus of litigation, including Foley Hoag defeating class certification, summary judgment and prevailing in two jury trials, this case has now reached its conclusion: the Massachusetts Appeals Court agreed that Weiss lacked standing in this case. He decided to use his established business to provide services to Loomis Sayles, and in doing so, he was precluded from claiming that Loomis Sayles misclassified him.
"We could not be more pleased by this outcome for our client," said Foley Hoag partner and Labor & Employment practice co-chair Allison Anderson. "This Appeals Court decision affirms Loomis Sayles' longstanding position that legitimate business-to-business relationships cannot be disregarded simply because a plaintiff brings a misclassification claim; to hold otherwise would be to cause major mayhem to the economy of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts."
The Foley Hoag team consisted of attorneys Anderson, Jim Bucking, Matthew Baltay, Christian Garcia, Natalie Panariello and senior paralegal Carla Nigro.
We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.