Opinion
04-400, 570623/04.
Decided October 17, 2005.
Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Civil Court, New York County, entered on or about October 23, 2003 after a nonjury trial (Anil C. Singh, J.), in favor of plaintiff and awarding him damages in the principal sum of $12,000.
Judgment entered on or about October 23, 2003 (Anil C. Singh, J.) affirmed, with $25 costs.
PRESENT: McCooe, J.P., Davis, Schoenfeld, JJ.
Plaintiff, an at-will employee, brought this action for breach of contract to enforce payment of a $12,000 bonus for the year 2001. Pursuant to a written offer of employment, plaintiff had been hired as Assistant Production Manager, commencing September 5, 2000, "at a gross annual salary of $60,000 plus an annual bonus of $12,000." At the end of 2000, plaintiff received, in addition to his salary, a pro rata share of the $12,000 bonus for work performed that year. Plaintiff worked the entire year in 2001, receiving his full $60,000 salary, and was terminated at the end of January 2002, for budgetary reasons, without receiving any bonus payment for 2001.
Defendant argued at trial that it had no obligation to pay the 2001 bonus because its bonus policy was discretionary as to all employees except those who had written contracts guaranteeing a year-end bonus. The trial court determined that plaintiff's bonus was an integral part of his compensation package, and that plaintiff was thus entitled to it for 2001.
Whether the obligation to pay a bonus to an employee is discretionary is an issue of fact ( see Mirchel v. RMJ Sec. Corp., 205 AD2d 388; Weiner v. Diebold Group, 173 AD2d 166). We agree with the findings of the trial court that there was a valid and enforceable promise as to the bonus. Defendant's written offer of employment clearly defined plaintiff's compensation in terms of both base salary and bonus. When a bonus that is an integral part of a compensation package has already been earned by the time the employer decides not to pay it, the latter can no longer argue that such bonus is discretionary; at that point, failure to pay it constitutes a breach of the contract of employment ( see Harden v. Warner Amex Cable Communications, 642 F Supp 1080, 1096 [SD NY 1986]). The defendant's letter offer gave no indication that the bonus was in any way discretionary, and thus was reasonably susceptible of only one interpretation ( cf. Namad v. Salomon Inc., 74 NY2d 751; Kaplan v. Capital Co. of Am., 298 AD2d 110, lv denied 99 NY2d 510).
This constitutes the decision and order of the Court.