NOTICE: Summary decisions issued by the Appeals Court pursuant to M.A.C. Rule 23.0, as appearing in 97 Mass. App. Ct. 1017 (2020) (formerly known as rule 1:28, as amended by 73 Mass. App. Ct. 1001 [2009]), are primarily directed to the parties and, therefore, may not fully address the facts of the case or the panel's decisional rationale. Moreover, such decisions are not circulated to the entire court and, therefore, represent only the views of the panel that decided the case. A summary decision pursuant to rule 23.0 or rule 1:28 issued after February 25, 2008, may be cited for its persuasive value but, because of the limitations noted above, not as binding precedent. See Chace v. Curran, 71 Mass. App. Ct. 258, 260 n.4 (2008). COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS APPEALS COURT 22-P-247 RC INTERNATIONAL TEMP SERVICES, INC. vs. COLISEUM COMPANIES, INC.1 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 23.0 The plaintiff, RC International Temp Services, Inc. (RC International), appeals from a judgment of dismissal, without prejudice, entered for lack of prosecution. RC International argues that the judge erred in dismissing the case and in denying the plaintiff's "Motion to Appoint Receiver." We affirm. Background. In April 2018, RC International, a temporary employment agency, filed its first amended complaint2 against the defendant, Coliseum Companies, Inc. (Coliseum), an operator of commercial laundry facilities in Massachusetts. RC International alleged, inter alia, that it provided "temporary 1 Doing business as Bay State Linen. 2 RC International filed its original complaint on March 26, 2018. workers" for employment at Coliseum; Coliseum agreed to pay RC International the "cost" of each temporary worker; the cost of each temporary worker included compliance with each worker's "legally mandated wages" (including but not limited to minimum and overtime wages, unemployment, workers' compensation, and Federal Insurance Contributions Act tax obligations); Coliseum's payments to RC International were insufficient to pay for the workers' legally mandated wages; and, as a result, Coliseum "prevented [RC International] from satisfying those obligations and has given rise to outstanding claims against [RC International and other temporary employment agencies] for certain sums and for potential penalties." In other words, because of Coliseum's breaches of its contract and obligations, RC International could not pay the temporary workers what they were owed and thus those workers have claims against RC International.3 At some later date in 2018, RC International's sole owner and officer, who is subject to Massachusetts criminal proceedings and Federal immigration restrictions, moved to the Dominican Republic. RC International's counsel has not had any 3 At the hearing on the motion to dismiss and motion to appoint a receiver, counsel for RC International further represented, inter alia, that it filed suit to "get compensation for the asset which was converted," the asset being RC International's temporary workers that Coliseum allegedly stole from RC International. 2 contact with him since he left the United States. On June 28, 2019, RC International was "dissolved by Court Order or by the [Secretary of the Commonwealth]." Although the parties engaged in limited …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals