Hoelzle v. Vensure Emp'r Servs.

Full title: BRIAN HOELZLE, Plaintiff, v. VENSURE EMPLOYER SERVICES, INC., et al.…

Court: United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Feb 18, 2022

Civil Action 2:20-cv-00473-KSM (E.D. Pa. Feb. 18, 2022)

Opinion

Civil Action 2:20-cv-00473-KSM

02-18-2022

BRIAN HOELZLE, Plaintiff, v. VENSURE EMPLOYER SERVICES, INC., et al., Defendants.

KAREN SPENCER MARSTON, J.

ORDER

KAREN SPENCER MARSTON, J.

AND NOW, this 18th day of February, 2022, upon consideration of Defendants' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 29) and Plaintiff's Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 34) and following oral argument on February 16, 2022, it is ORDERED as follows:

1. As to Count I, breach of contract, Defendants' motion is GRANTED as against Defendant Vensure Employer Services, Inc. (“Vensure”) and DENIED as against Defendant EmployeeMax Acquisition, LLC (“EmployeeMax”). Plaintiff's motion is GRANTED as to Defendant EmployeeMax, and FINAL JUDGMENT in the amount of Thirty-Eight Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety-Eight Dollars and Twenty-Six Cents ($38,998.26) shall be entered against Defendant EmployeeMax and in favor of Plaintiff Brian Hoelzle, subject to continued interest at 10 percent per annum.

2. As to Count II, unjust enrichment, Defendants' motion is DENIED as moot, and Plaintiff's motion is DENIED as moot.

3. As to Count III, the Pennsylvania Wage Payment and Collection Law, Defendants' motion is GRANTED as against Defendant Vensure and DENIED as against Defendant EmployeeMax. Plaintiff's motion is GRANTED as against Defendant EmployeeMax; however, Plaintiff's motion is DENIED as to liquidated damages and DENIED without prejudice to file a motion for attorneys' fees as to attorneys' fees. Plaintiff SHALL file a motion for attorneys' fees within thirty days of the entry of this Order.

4. As to Count IV, wrongful termination, Defendants' motion is GRANTED.

5. As to Count V, breach of contract, Defendants' motion is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's motion is DENIED.

6. As to Count VI, promissory estoppel, Defendants' motion is GRANTED.

7. As to Counterclaim Count I, tortious interference with contractual relations, Plaintiff's motion is GRANTED.

8. As to Counterclaim Count II, tortious interference with prospective contractual relations, Plaintiff's motion is GRANTED.

9. As to Counterclaim Count III, commercial disparagement, Plaintiff's motion is GRANTED.

10. As to Counterclaim Count IV, defamation, Plaintiff's motion is GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.