Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Citation
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Parent Document
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Jurisdiction
- Massachusetts (state)
- Effective Date
- 2018-11-16
Other Sections in This Document (23)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
- Bermudez v. Dielectrics, Inc., 113 N.E.3d 927 (2018)
Full Text
1,129 charsIn dismissing the amended complaint, the motion judge adopted the first judge's ruling that the defendant was not Bermudez's employer. In her appeal, Bermudez has argued that the first judge erred in this finding. Bermudez points to G. L. c. 152, § 1, which defines employer as "both the general employer and the special employer in any case where both relationships exist with respect to an employee." G. L. c. 152, § 1 (5). Using the statutory definition, Bermudez claims that Career Group was her general employer and that Dielectrics was her special employer. See Molina v. State Garden, Inc., 88 Mass. App. Ct. 173, 175-176, 37 N.E.3d 39 (2015). As such, Bermudez maintains that the defendant is an employer and is subject to a claim pursuant to G. L. c. 152, § 75B (2). Because the defendant concedes that it is her employer, we need not analyze this issue further. Accordingly, the sole issue on appeal is whether Bermudez's third-party action against the defendant is a right "afforded by" G. L. c. 152, § 15, such that her termination for pursuing that right would allow a claim for violation of G. L. c. 152, § 75B (2).